Time zones and the creation story

[excreationist]

In Genesis 1, the days involve an "evening" and "morning" but only some parts of the earth would be in that time of day - areas on the opposite side would have the opposite time of day. So which part of earth is it in respect to? The garden of Eden? But dry land only appeared on the third day, so initially the focus of the evening/morning would have been under water!

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

 

[Keith&Co.]

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

Well, yeah.

Everything in Genesis reflects a Flat Earth. And most of the rest of the Books agree.

The sun sleeps in a little doghouse at night, the sky is solid and like the walls of a tent, the Earth was created by spreading it across the waters below like a mud pie...
God will remove the Evil off of earth by grabbing the edges and shaking it like avrug...
That's why so many Flat Earthers keep waving their bibles at the 'debates.'

 

[Politesse]

In Genesis 1, the days involve an "evening" and "morning" but only some parts of the earth would be in that time of day - areas on the opposite side would have the opposite time of day. So which part of earth is it in respect to? The garden of Eden? But dry land only appeared on the third day, so initially the focus of the evening/morning would have been under water!

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

Well, as the sun had not been created yet when this day/night cycle started, I don't see relative lighting could have been present, let alone significant to the story.

 

[excreationist]

....Well, as the sun had not been created yet when this day/night cycle started, I don't see relative lighting could have been present, let alone significant to the story.

It's odd that the lighting supposedly went from absolute to relative on day 4 (creation of the Sun) with no mention of the change in how "evening" and "morning" work. Maybe the original light source after darkness was created could have been where the Sun ended up being.

 

[ideologyhunter]

God only invented time zones when there were clocks. Cuckoo clocks.

 

[skepticalbip]

....Well, as the sun had not been created yet when this day/night cycle started, I don't see relative lighting could have been present, let alone significant to the story.

It's odd that the lighting supposedly went from absolute to relative on day 4 (creation of the Sun) with no mention of the change in how "evening" and "morning" work. Maybe the original light source after darkness was created could have been where the Sun ended up being.

It was not understood that it was the sun that made the day light at the time Genesis was written. Light just was, god created light on day one then divided it from the dark and called the light day and the dark night. The sun and moon were created on the fourth day as afterthoughts to rule the day and night that had already been created three days earlier by the understanding of Genesis' writers. According to those writer's understanding, the light of day still had nothing to do with the sun other than maybe to let the sun know when to come out.

I have no idea why they had not figured out that the sun was the source of light. Maybe it was as simple as they noticed that it was still light under a heavy tree canopy where the sun couldn't be seen so concluded that the light didn't come from the sun.

 

[bilby]

....Well, as the sun had not been created yet when this day/night cycle started, I don't see relative lighting could have been present, let alone significant to the story.

It's odd that the lighting supposedly went from absolute to relative on day 4 (creation of the Sun) with no mention of the change in how "evening" and "morning" work. Maybe the original light source after darkness was created could have been where the Sun ended up being.

It was not understood that it was the sun that made the day light at the time Genesis was written. Light just was, god created light on day one then divided it from the dark and called the light day and the dark night. The sun and moon were created on the fourth day as afterthoughts to rule the day and night that had already been created three days earlier by the understanding of Genesis' writers. According to those writer's understanding, the light of day still had nothing to do with the sun other than maybe to let the sun know when to come out.

I have no idea why they had not figured out that the sun was the source of light. Maybe it was as simple as they noticed that it was still light under a heavy tree canopy where the sun couldn't be seen so concluded that the light didn't come from the sun.

Frankly, it would have been better if God had arranged for the sun to be up at nighttime, when the light would have come in handy.

 

[skepticalbip]

It was not understood that it was the sun that made the day light at the time Genesis was written. Light just was, god created light on day one then divided it from the dark and called the light day and the dark night. The sun and moon were created on the fourth day as afterthoughts to rule the day and night that had already been created three days earlier by the understanding of Genesis' writers. According to those writer's understanding, the light of day still had nothing to do with the sun other than maybe to let the sun know when to come out.

I have no idea why they had not figured out that the sun was the source of light. Maybe it was as simple as they noticed that it was still light under a heavy tree canopy where the sun couldn't be seen so concluded that the light didn't come from the sun.

Frankly, it would have been better if God had arranged for the sun to be up at nighttime, when the light would have come in handy.

But if the sun was up at night then no one would be able to see it because it would be too dark outside.

 

[Lion IRC]

In Genesis 1, the days involve an "evening" and "morning" but only some parts of the earth would be in that time of day - areas on the opposite side would have the opposite time of day. So which part of earth is it in respect to? The garden of Eden? But dry land only appeared on the third day, so initially the focus of the evening/morning would have been under water!

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

What makes you think there was no motion of celestial objects in Genesis?
Perpetual daylight on one side of the earth only?

 

[excreationist]

What makes you think there was no motion of celestial objects in Genesis?
Perpetual daylight on one side of the earth only?

The Sun is still in respect to the solar system. As you probably know it is the earth that rotates and orbits the Sun meaning that daylight on the earth is temporary.

 

[excreationist]

On Facebook:

A creationist:

My opinion is the frame of reference is Eden. That is in the area of the Middle East of today, in particular the fertile crescent. Yes, it would have been underwater until dry land appeared.
The light was NOT coming from the sun in the first 3 days of creation week. I believe it would have been coming from the Son as in Revelation 21.
I am not a flat Earther but I can respect the view that the perspective of the writer of Genesis is that of a flat Earth.

Me:

As far as the light source before the Sun goes, I think in Revelation 23 it is saying that light is everywhere, like at the start in Genesis 1. On the first day the light is separated from the darkness. One way of doing this would be to put the light where the Sun was going to be and the darkness would be on the dark side of the earth.

Them:

Yep. Possibly.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Huh. All those hours wasted trying to figure out if Spider-man could adhere to things by the skin on his back, I could have been retconning Genesis to try to make sense out of the story...

 

[Bronzeage]

In Genesis 1, the days involve an "evening" and "morning" but only some parts of the earth would be in that time of day - areas on the opposite side would have the opposite time of day. So which part of earth is it in respect to? The garden of Eden? But dry land only appeared on the third day, so initially the focus of the evening/morning would have been under water!

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

The real problem was that ancient people were stupid. What a bunch of morons. Imagine what it would look like if the Earth really was flat.

 

[Gun Nut]

In Genesis 1, the days involve an "evening" and "morning" but only some parts of the earth would be in that time of day - areas on the opposite side would have the opposite time of day. So which part of earth is it in respect to? The garden of Eden? But dry land only appeared on the third day, so initially the focus of the evening/morning would have been under water!

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

The real problem was that ancient people were stupid. What a bunch of morons. Imagine what it would look like if the Earth really was flat.

It would look exactly like it does now to most people (that aren't high up in the air).

The Earth may not be flat, but it is certainly "perfectly" smooth... and I live in the Rockies at over 9,000 feet above sea level.

By "perfectly", I mean that no thing created by man has ever been made more smooth than the Earth has been made.

 

[Keith&Co.]

. Imagine what it would look like if the Earth really was flat.

You mean, like, if traveling to a mountain, you see the mountain and the foothills at the same time?

Or standing on the shore of a big lake, you see the other shore, not just hills that are behind the beach?

Saiiing ships, the top sails, weatherdeck, and waterline all appear together?

Or clouds! At sunrise, or sunset, the clouds get lit up at the same time as the lands they're over?

 

[bilby]

In Genesis 1, the days involve an "evening" and "morning" but only some parts of the earth would be in that time of day - areas on the opposite side would have the opposite time of day. So which part of earth is it in respect to? The garden of Eden? But dry land only appeared on the third day, so initially the focus of the evening/morning would have been under water!

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

The real problem was that ancient people were stupid. What a bunch of morons. Imagine what it would look like if the Earth really was flat.

It would look exactly like it does now to most people (that aren't high up in the air).

The Earth may not be flat, but it is certainly "perfectly" smooth... and I live in the Rockies at over 9,000 feet above sea level.

By "perfectly", I mean that no thing created by man has ever been made more smooth than the Earth has been made.

[Citation needed]

The Earth most assuredly is NOT as smooth as you claim here.

Indeed, it's highly debatable whether Earth is as smooth as a billiard ball, and those are FAR from being the smoothest artefacts we have made.

 

[Bronzeage]

. Imagine what it would look like if the Earth really was flat.

You mean, like, if traveling to a mountain, you see the mountain and the foothills at the same time?

Or standing on the shore of a big lake, you see the other shore, not just hills that are behind the beach?

Saiiing ships, the top sails, weatherdeck, and waterline all appear together?

Or clouds! At sunrise, or sunset, the clouds get lit up at the same time as the lands they're over?

Right about the time it became important to understand that the Earth was a sphere, they figured it out. The only real question was how big a sphere.

 

[excreationist]

...By "perfectly", I mean that no thing created by man has ever been made more smooth than the Earth has been made.

"if this was the earth, the highest mountain and lowest valley would be about 14 metres apart"

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

In Genesis 1, the days involve an "evening" and "morning" but only some parts of the earth would be in that time of day - areas on the opposite side would have the opposite time of day. So which part of earth is it in respect to? The garden of Eden? But dry land only appeared on the third day, so initially the focus of the evening/morning would have been under water!

But if the earth is flat and the whole earth is the same time of day then there is an absolute "morning" or "evening"... maybe that's what the writer had in mind.

The real problem was that ancient people were stupid. What a bunch of morons. Imagine what it would look like if the Earth really was flat.

It would look exactly like it does now to most people (that aren't high up in the air).

The Earth may not be flat, but it is certainly "perfectly" smooth... and I live in the Rockies at over 9,000 feet above sea level.

By "perfectly", I mean that no thing created by man has ever been made more smooth than the Earth has been made.

You need to get out more. The mirrors on the new James Webb Space Telescope are polished to an "average" roughness that is several thousand times more smooth than the Earth's surface.

 

[Gun Nut]

cool! Interesting to know. Someone get Neil deGrasse Tyson up to speed too! Them scientists sure LOOK like they just make shit up.