A Sunny Conundrum
The sky plays an important role in answering a common challenge to biblical creation. In response to the Genesis creation account, people often wonder, if the Sun was created on day four, then where did the light come from on day one? And didn’t the plants created on day 3 need the Sun to perform photosynthesis?
Coming from an old-earth view, RTB offers a solution to this supposed inconsistency (outlined particularly well in Hugh Ross’ booklet Genesis One). To explain what happened on day four, we must start at the beginning with Genesis 1:1.
- Before day one: The Hebrew definition for “the heavens and the earth,” as used in Genesis 1:1, indicates that the entire physical universe was created prior to day one. That means the Sun was already in existence.
- A different perspective: Genesis 1:2 shifts the “view” from outer space to the surface of the “formless and empty” Earth. (Picture a film camera zooming in from a shot of the New York City skyline to the crowds walking along 34th Street.) This new frame of reference—vital for interpreting the following passages—puts readers (or listeners) in the position of an Earth-bound observer looking up at the sky.
- Initial conditions: In Job 38:9, God himself describes Earth’s initial atmosphere: “I made the clouds its [the sea’s] garment and wrapped it in thick darkness.” Science supports this description based on astronomers’ observations of protoplanetary (pre-forming) systems and extrasolar planets and theoretical studies of our own planetary neighbors.
- “Let there be light”: On day one, the opaque atmosphere became translucent, just clear enough to allow the passage of light. However, an Earth-bound observer would not, at this point, have seen the sources of this light. (As Hugh explains it, hāyâ—the Hebrew verb used in the phrase “Let there be light”—does not indicate that light came into existence for the first time on day one.)
- The Sun appears: Finally, on day four, the atmosphere cleared enough to become transparent and allow a terrestrial observer to see the sources of both daytime and nighttime light. The Hebrew verb used in Genesis 1:16 (‘āśâ) indicates the Sun, Moon, and stars had actually been created prior to day four.
Should someone ask about the Genesis creation timeline, you might say the celestial bodies had been around sometime before becoming visible from Earth’s surface. Hugh often points out that Earth is in the best position (and humans at the best point in cosmological history) to allow us to study the universe and learn about the ways God prepped the planet for our presence. Like a master engineer, the Creator fine-tuned Earth’s sky to clear at the just-right moments so that someday, we could savor and delight in His masterfully artistic sunsets and give Him glory for it.
—Maureen
Resources: Hugh’s booklet Genesis One: A Scientific Perspective provides a concise outline of RTB’s interpretation of the Genesis creation account. And for an intriguing study of the Scriptural support for this interpretation, I’d recommend our group Bible study The Bigger Picture on Creation by Krista Bontrager.
October 7, 2011 at 5:28 pm
I was just in a discussion about this very topic with a young earther. Young earthers often claim that God was the source of light for the first three days. So, I asked, “Why would God detail as a creation event in Scripture (day one) characteristics or attirbutes about Himself when He is eternal, uncreated?”
His answer was that the creation of light detailed on day one was a different type of light that was created by God and he cited 1Timothy 6:16 and asked, “How can God then, who is light, live in an unapproachable light?” His inference being that there must be a type of light other than God Himself or solar light.
While I see problems with this interpretation, it is an interestng interpretation I had not heard before.
October 8, 2011 at 10:22 am
John,
The reference to 1 John 1:5 “GOD IS LIGHT, and in Him there is NO DARKNESS” is not about being a light source. It is about God’s purity and Holiness. This can be seen from the context (I John 1:5-9). Otherwise we should have beams of light shining down on us (1 John 1:7). This theme is also expressed by James (James 1:17, “the FATHER OF LIGHTS, with whom there is no variation or SHADOW of turning”). So, that young-earther has no argument here.
God does project a light, which is unapproachable (Ex. 33:18-23, 34:29-35; Ps. 104:2; Matt. 17:2). This light will light the New Creation (Rev. 21:23-25, 22:5). At that time everyone and everything will be eternal and pure (2 Peter 3:13; Rev. 21:27), so we will not be destroyed by His glory/light (Ex. 33:20 vs. Matt. 5:8; Rev. 22:4). Also see First Cor. 15:42-49, 52-54.
October 8, 2011 at 2:43 pm
Kenny,
Thanks for the biblical references. I have come to believe that the preponderance of evidence from Scripture points to a day-age interpretation of creation. More and more, I see the 24 hour interpretation of creation as being divergent (raises more questions than answers) whereas the day-age view tends to be convergent (resolves more questons than it raises).
The problems you pointed out were the ones I saw with it also. I define a day as having the presence of light (Gen 1:5) regardless of the time frame from a human perpsective. The young earther defined a day as a 24 hour rotation of the earth regardless of the presence of light or darkness. We really diverged with our interpretations the moment he said (and this is a direct quote), “Where does it say that you have to have ‘light’ in order to have a day?” When I cited Gen 1:5 he took of with the “third form of light” discussion, which to me, was new interpretation but it seemed weak.
October 8, 2011 at 10:46 am
RTB is correct about the light of day one. God tells Job why we have the dark, etc conditions in Gen. 1:2; see Job 38:8-9. It was because of a thick atmosphere. The stars were already in place when earth was created (Job 38:4-7).
The phrase “the heavens and the earth,” in Gen. 1:1, is a merism. It means the entire universe and all that is in it. Even young-earth creationists like Dr. Sarfati agree (Refuting Compromise, p. 102).
The Hebrew word haya “let be” is only used in the creation command three times (Gen. 1:3, 6 and 14). Each time it is a command connected with transforming the atmosphere. On day one, the dense, dark atmosphere was thinned (allowing light through). On day two, the steamy/foggy atmosphere was lifted from the oceans surface, forming the open air and the clouds above (dividing waters above the expanse from waters below it). On day four, the atmosphere was clear to allow the lights to act as signs for times. Remember, the context of the six days is earth’s surface.
The initial conditions found in Gen. 1:2 include the fact that the Holy Spirit is hovering or moving over the surface of the waters. Because of this, we should understand everything that follows from His perspective. In other words, He is looking around, above, and below the water’s surface. He is not at some point beyond earth. Further support for the earth’s surface being the frame of reference comes from days 4 and 5. The lights can only act as signs from the viewpoint of the earth. Likewise, when it says that the birds fly “above the earth, across the face of the sky (expanse of the heavens),” this is from an earth bound view. The “face of the sky,” is the cloud layer as seen by the observer below it.
October 11, 2011 at 11:26 am
Awesome conversation. Thank, Kenny, for jumping in there.
January 31, 2013 at 12:28 pm
I am genuinely glad to glance at this website posts which includes plenty of helpful information,
thanks for providing such data.