[Here is an online debate I engaged in on Youtube with an atheist a little while ago. He had asked a really good question. My responses is in "normal" font, while the atheist's responses is in the bold font.]
"Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also."
(Genesis 1:16)
On the contrary my good friend, they are both seen as lights in the sky. The Scripture text you question is Genesis 1:16, which reads, "Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also." Your question to this Bible passage is as follows: "So if we should believe what the bible says when it says we know god exists, should we also believe when the bible states that god created two lights, one for the day and one for the night (sunlight and moonlight) even though we know that moonlight is just a reflection of sunlight so there really isn't two lights? Do you believe that it's two lights or do you believe what science tells us?" I don't think you realize that the answer is found in your very question! The text in question clearly identifies the sun and moon as sources of light during the day and the night. There's no disputing that fact. Yes it's true the sun is a literal source of light, whereas the moon by itself is not. That much is obvious from a scientific stand point. Now here's the part where you answer your own question. You stated that "moonlight is just a reflection of sunlight." Exactly the point. The moon is NOT a huge ball of fire that gives light like the sun does, it only reflects the light of the sun on the earth. Since we both don't question that the "sun" that rules the day is an actual source of light. It is the moon that you question as a source of light. The Scripture text only tells us that the sun and moon are two sources of light. It does not tell us WHY they are both sources of light, they just tell us WHAT their function is "the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night." Any person with eyes to see can appreciate the light a full moon gives on a clear night sky. People KNOW the moon at night gets its light from the sun, yet they DO NOT question it as a source of light at night. The truth is, it's not the moon's reflection of sunlight that cancels out the notion that the moon is a source of light. The fact is, the moon IS a source of light at night that people enjoy. Hence, we have the "lesser light" which is the moon that rules the night. There is no denying that fact. So not only does science support that fact, but the Bible confirms this truth as well.
My friend, nice try to explain away facts. The truth is either you never read my response or ignored what I wrote. Now let's look at what you said:
"Sorry....but I don't see it that way. It clearly says he created TWO great lights. This implies two different lights and not "sources" of lights. It's like me telling you I installed two light bulbs in a lamp. One to rule the day (without a lamp shade) and the other to rule the night (with a lamp shade). I didn't install two different light bulbs all I did was put something over the ONE light bulb. And of course people KNOW the moon gets it's light from the sun because it's been investigated."
First, you need to reread and think about what I really said. This is not hard to do.
Second, of course you don't see it that way. All you see is TWO great lights, but fail to understand the context being conveyed in the Scripture text in question. You said, "This implies two different lights and not "sources" of lights." Well of course they are "two different lights." A simple observation makes that clear. You missed what I said in my previous response to you. This is what I stated: "Yes it's true the sun is a literal source of light, whereas the moon by itself is not. That much is obvious from a scientific stand point." Did you catch that? Your straw-man rebuttal on this point had already been answered.
Third, you said: "It's like me telling you I installed two light bulbs in a lamp. One to rule the day (without a lamp shade) and the other to rule the night (with a lamp shade). I didn't install two different light bulbs all I did was put something over the ONE light bulb. And of course people KNOW the moon gets it's light from the sun because it's been investigated." Your "light bulb" and "lamp shade" analogy is faulty. Why? Because you fail to acknowledge my recognition that the sun is the "literal source" of light, while the moon is the reflection of that light. Yet both can be observed as two different sources of light. The context of Genesis 1:16 is NOT talking about TWO separate literal sources of light. We know the sun is the only literal source of light. Yet, both give light, one during the day the other during the night. This is the FACT of the matter. This is the TRUTH that Genesis 1:16 is talking about.
Next, you wrote: "2,000 or so years ago in middle aged palestine where most people were probably illiterate and didn't know how the universe worked? I would think they would write something like a god creating two lights because they see the difference but don't know what else to think but that and they think that's the truth, based off their limited observation."
First, the Scripture passage in question, Genesis 1:16 is far older than 2, 000 years ago.
Second, It was not written by the Apostles, but by Moses the prophet.
Third, If you knew anything about history, true history, you would know Moses was NO illiterate or ignorant man. He spent the early part of his life educated, trained, and disciplined under the rule of Pharaoh. He had the best education anyone can ask for during his time. Not to mention, he had the help of God as well.
Fourth, Both archaeology and history reveals the fact that ancient Egypt was the super power of its time as well as very advanced. Scientists still have a tough time figuring out how exactly the pyramids were built. Sure they have theories, but no real concrete facts.
Fifth, Oh yeah, one more thing, scientists today are starting to admit how wrong they are in thinking the ancients were a bunch of ignorant, uneducated buffoons. Even the Roman Empire during the time of Christ was quite advanced.
You are the perfect example why I don't do Bible studies with atheists. Yes, I can present evidence to you, but there comes a point when it is a waste of my time to do so. Especially when one is closed minded to examining the facts.
You wrote: "The fact that you can speak for the bible in stating that it means it's talking about sources of light and not two separate lights, proves how much of an apologist you really are."
Lol, man, if you are indeed reading my responses, you sure have a strange way of misinterpreting what I say. Man, THINK before you respond. Here, let me break it down for you. Since you don't seem to understand what I wrote:
SUN=The actual source of light.
--Rules the Day time.
MOON=The reflection of the sun light.
--Rules the Night time.
They are both two separate forms of light, though the moon only reflects the sunlight. It is still a source of light at night. Hence, BOTH are considered to be two sources of light, the greater light to rule the day, the lesser light to rule the night. If they are NOT according to your reasoning, then we must commit intellectual suicide and pretend the moon does not shine, when it really shines at night. The Genesis 1:16 passage DOES NOT contradict itself when it calls these two forms of light, "two great lights." Yet, here you are illogically arguing against the facts I presented to you in this thread.
By the way, I am not a "Christian Apologist," just an ordinary Christian who uses apologetics to reason with those who CAN be reasoned with.
Well then, I am glad we agree on the scientific aspect of the issue, Lol. Hey, I want to first commend you for asking such a great question and for being mature and civil in our exchanges. Unfortunately most atheists on Youtube are not capable of doing that. I'm sure there are some Christians on here that are just as bad as well. Anyway, back to the topic at hand.
You made this statement: "My problem is with how you can interpret what the bible says about this and think it clearly states that the sun is the source of light and the moon is just reflecting the sunlight when you know the only reason you are saying this is because science confirms this and this is your way of trying to prove the bible was right all along."
LMAO, I am NOT only saying that because science confirms it. Nothing could be further from the truth. I don't need science to be the primary authority to prove the Bible is right. Science can only be used as a tool to confirm things in the Bible, but is limited, when it comes to the supernatural aspects of the Scriptures. Remember, you are the one who originally brought up this subject about the "two great lights" that Genesis 1:16 records. For one, the Bible was not written as a scientific text book, nor did I ever imply it was. Science, true science that is, gives us the details of how both the sun and moon operate as the two great lights that rule the day and the night. The Genesis passage just records the fact that there are two "great lights" the earth benefits from; science fills in the details in how they function as lights. The sun is a huge power source of great energy, heat, and light; whereas the moon consists of a rocky and sandy surface, with craters scattered throughout the entire surface of the moon. Yet, both of these objects are referred to as sources of light. The sun, the greater light that rules the day, and the moon, the lesser light that rules the night. I'm sure this is not hard for you to understand.
No comments:
Post a Comment