There is nothing at all strange about the reality of light existing independent of the heavenly bodies.It is a well-established fact, illustrated in multiple ways, that “light” certainly is not restricted to the sun and the other luminaries of our universe.Just consider that phenomenon known as “lightning,” or ask the friendly “firefly” about the matter. This initial “light” was temporary, for the sun was assigned the function of the “greater light” on the fourth day. The “light” of Genesis 1:3 obviously radiated from a “fixed” source, in its relationship to the earth, inasmuch as it facilitated the dark-to-light arrangement, as the primitive orb rotated upon its axis. The fact is, it is not possible to know exactly what the initial light-source was, for we have no information beyond what is affirmed in verse 3, and that is merely stated, not explained.There are, however, a couple of logical conclusions that may be drawn from the sketchy data presented. Nor can it be argued legitimately that the sun, moon, and stars were “created” on the first day of the initial week, and then were simply made to “appear” on the fourth day, as advocates of the Gap Theory have attempted to establish.There is no basis in the Hebrew text for that conclusion. The Bible student must deduce that the “light” of Genesis 1:3 was not that which subsequently (three days later) emanated from the sun, the moon, or the stars.The fiat of verse 14, “Let there be lights,” expresses the same sort of creative activity - out of nothing came something by the command of God - that is affirmed in verse 3. “In Genesis 1:3, the Old Testament records that God said: ‘Let there be light.’Since the sun, moon, and stars were not made until the fourth day (1:14-16), what was the nature of the ‘light’ mentioned in verse 3?”
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |