In answer to a blogger's question of why Genesis has stars, sun made after the Earth

Because this blogger rejected my comment to leave on his post in answer to this guy's question, I have posted it here instead. Apparently, to most Christians my ideas are still witchcraft and I shall be burned at he stake. 

http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/2010/09/stephen-hawking-proves-the-existence-of-god-2/

zuma August 4, 2013 at 8:48 am

Big Bang timeline contradicts Genesis 1.

In accordance to the Big Bang timeline, stars and galaxies were formed approximately 12 to 15 billion years before the present and yet the sun was formed 4.6 billion years ago. The earth was subsequently formed approximately 4.54 billion years.

The following is the sequence that has been laid out by the scripture:

a)The heaven and earth were created prior to any substances:

Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” The word, earth, in Genesis 1:1 gives the implication the earth was created the earliest as the same as heaven. Yet stars were formed prior to the earth’s formation in accordance to the Big Bang timeline.

b)The creation of sun:

According to the scripture, the sun was created after the creation of the earth:

Genesis 1:3-4, “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and God divided the light from the darkness.” Even if one would consider the creation of sun on day four, it would still fall after Genesis 1:1, the creation of the earth.

As the creation of sun, Genesis 1:3-4 was placed after the creation of the earth, Genesis 1:1, it implies that the sun was created after the creation of the earth. Yet in the Big Bang timeline, it shows the reverse and that is the sun was formed 4.6 billion years before the earth, 4.54 billion years.

c)The creation of stars:

Genesis 1:16, “And 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.”

The phrase, [he made] the stars also, in Genesis 1:16 implies the creation of stars.

As the creation of stars in Genesis 1:16 was placed after the creation of the earth (Genesis 1:1) and the sun (Genesis 1:3-4), it implies that stars were created prior to the creation of the earth and sun. Yet in Big Bang timeline, it shows the reverse since stars were formed in approximately 12 to 15 billion years ago before the formation of the earth, 4.54 billion years, and the sun, 4.6 billion years.

The discrepancies as mentioned above between the Big Bang and the scripture have placed the reliability of Big Bang theory into question.

How could Christians engross in Big Bang theory then?

I think Christians come in three groups. One is the group where they take the moral teaches, but don't read many passages literally. The other group takes the moral teachings and the passages literally superficially (which is what you have done above). The other group takes the moral lessons and the passages literally with deeper understanding.

I fall in the last group, but I would also call myself a Buddhist, a Jew, a Sufist, a Hindu, a Kabbalist, and a Naturalist as well as a Spiritualist. I think there are truths in many teachings and BS as well.

For the explanation, I will give summed up version of what took me four years of study and of which I consequently wrote a book about entitled The Ancient Genesis. Now, the book could have been inspired by a higher power, by just men or be complete rubbish. I will not argue that point. What I will say is that when one reads, one needs to read carefully, be it of any literature to understand context of culture, context of history and context of intention.

Basically the jist is this. Learn some Hebrew and Phonetician and also ancient and modern day Hebrew culture.

When you do you will understand these basic principles:

1-Yom which is defined as a day in Genesis can mean A Period of Time. (There is a lot of references and support for this in my book). Further common sense might lead one to ask how is a day defined before the Earth or Sun are said to even exist...in Day 1 and Day 2, and some of Day 3.

2-Bara is for spiritual creation only in Genesis 1. Period. This word is translated in the English as created (s). After much much study I have come to realize this to be the true case. This occurs in Day 1 when the building blocks of everything arose. This occurs in Day 5 for the life of water animals. This occurs in Day 6 for the life of humans. (There is further understanding of why it only happens for water life supported in my book and notes, but basically land animals evolved from water life and so what was given to them in Day 5 eventually evolved into the land animals in Day 5 later.

3-Asha is for physical processes in Genesis 1 only. Period. This word is translated as made in English.

4-What Asha means than is to take the parts and build. Example. I have a hammer, nails, and wood. I now can build a house. There are scientific mechanisms that can explain every Asah process, because Asah is a physical process.

5-God does bring about many things in Genesis 1 Without the use of made or create, without the use of Asha and Bara.

Why use Asah and Bara then if God's words alone can bring about plants from the ground, etc. This is because those words give us more insight, more information, into what is actually happening. The focus is not that something is coming ....or has come, but  how and its relevance.

So, with some basic understanding let us go back to your question....

Why is the sun and stars mentioned in Day 4 when the Earth is mentioned in Day 3, clearly a day earlier.

Not only does that not make sense in terms of cosmological evolution, it doesn't make sense in terms of common sense. If a day is in fact the sun going up and down in accordance to the Earth, which clearly these people would see ....then how can you even have  day in Day 3 for the Earth BEFORE the appearance of the sun?

So, either the writer was very stupid, or he did this deliberately. I chose to think the later.

The basic answer is because before the Earth, the stars and sun did not have relevance, they would not have been seen. The word MADE which is actually Asah brings additional understanding as it means to give purpose, to give direction to give .

It means  natural processes used to guide, form, make, command, and direct information...using, guiding, preparing, maintaining, making

What the *intention* of this passage is is that: In this period of time, the sun and stars were now given purpose and relevance to the Earth, are being maintained in relation to the Earth.

*It does not mean that the sun and stars were created from nothing spontaneously and instantly in this moment and appeared suddenly right after the Earth.*

The rabbi Nahimandies (he lived 500 years ago so is not informed by modern day science) calls asah, ‘creation by in-formation’ and he calls bara ‘creation from nothing’. (As seen in his commentaries and in the back of my book)




Water, Tree of Life, Bible, Science, Darwin, Indians

Let us imagine for a brief minute that everything is water. The tree outside is water. The person beside you is water. The food you are eating is water. The sky above is water. The universe is water. You are water. Yes, imagine everything to be water. 

Now imagine, everything is linked because it is in fact all the same water...Rushing in and out of itself. 

Now, your mind and all consciousness imagine to be a net. 

This net moves through this water, catching things that are physical. The (water or the consciousness) manifested a table which got caught in your net, manifested a crab which got caught in your net, manifested a person which got caught in your net, manifested a star which got caught in your net. 

But all these physical things you caught are not real. They are not the water, but a manifestation- an illusion. The real is this water, this substance that is all things, this substance that we can't catch in our net to perceive it, see it or measure it. 

The water, the real, passes through our net all the time with little perception from most of us. 

It is interesting to me that the book of Genesis and even scriptures from other cultures use water to describe the early beginnings. Water is a very interesting phenomenon. In Genesis, the spirit hovered and moved over the surface of the abyss. The Earth was described first as a ball of water. 

Another picture from an image is that of a tree. In Genesis we find the Tree of Life. It is a very interesting image conjured in our minds. A TREE. And what is this tree of? LIFE.

Now, has anyone read Darwin's great book, Origin of the Species? Umm...I think there is something in there about a tree. Oh, yeah, the tree of biological evolution. 

Is it just me, or do those two trees seems very similar? 

On a different subject:

I think that if in biology we can see all our physical make-up described, retained and encoded into a single genome code, a code which could be considered in a way less then 3D...it makes sense that all the non-biology physical make-up would be found to be described, retained and encoded in a 2D format as well. 

This is what the current physicists are finding. This is called the Holographic Universe principle and while it was once not considered very viable, it is now being considered by most to be one of the more accurate descriptions of our universe. 

All the information that makes up our everything is really a code which we can't see directly. This makes everything we see really an illusion. Science is now showing us what many ancient spiritualists had said for millennia.  

I think that our FIELDS act actually like FILTERS, which filter this code from the other side... to our side. The information may look very disordered to us on the other side or perhaps it looks very ordered, but once it vibrates through the FIELDS, it takes on independent characteristics, in a way- like a personality, that makes the information appear separate and as independent parts and in a form we understand -have evolved to perceive. 

But lots of information is vibrating from the 2D format and in and out of this 'sphere of water' yet we don't perceive much of it, only that which is filtered through our fields which then becomes a part of our physical reality. 

Sometimes we might indirectly see some of this information and that is what virtual particles would be I think. "Virtual particles" are coming out of the nothingness of our space. This nothingness still has fields though and so the "wave-information" however minor has an interaction, but is not completely filtered to our physical reality so we don't experience it. 

I'll finish with my latest opinion in response to another closed minded individual caught in the web of reason alone while wearing blinders:

 No, I'm not saying to give credibility to other people's experiences. If you have not experienced it or have evidence of it then it would be stupid of you to just accept it.

What I am saying is that there is a difference to being narrow in your view of things, and open in your view of things. There is a difference in being blinded by your own arrogance and open to understanding. 

Humans don't have all the answers and might not be able to find them all. Our minds can only understand and perceive so much.

For myself I don't take the view so black and white as you. In my opinion you are superficially looking at faiths of the world like most and therefore seeing contradictions and so they are all wrong. 

I have two comments on that.

If you look at the words of the spiritual leaders and not the mumo-jumbo (Buddha, Hindu Guru, Kabbalist, Christ, Rumi) you find a lot of similarity. There is a common thread of oneness of everything, selflessness, compassion, love, harmony, denial of self, and many more commonalities.    

(In fact much of what the ancient Indian Spiritualist and Kabbalist and Sufist taught are showing to be possibly accurate by modern science from big bang, to worm holes, to the holographic universe, to everything literally being one though it appears separate, to the wholeness of all, to it all coming from nothing -which should be understood as a dynamic eternal nothingness not in the sense most think of it).

The geography, language, rituals, superstitions, clothing, dogma, and supernatural explanations are all just lines to make boxes for everyone to fit into. This is the superficial mumbo jumbo and was not taught by the spiritual leaders. 

There is an old Indian story: 
     There are six people in a dark room and one moves to the center to hit an object. He says, "It is a long bumpy thing with slim at the end." Another man moves to the center and says, "No, it is large and wide and leathery." The other man comes to the center and says, "No, it is short and furry and soft." The other man says, "No, it is like five rocks sitting on the sand." The next man says, "No, it is beating thump thump." The last man says, "No, it is flappy, and rounded and soft."
Then, the lights turn on and they see they have all found different parts to the same whole ---an elephant. 
 
FYI: Ancient people were capable of figuring out all kinds of things. The Mayans and Egyptians both had highly sophisticated understanding of the cosmos and the human body. Further since these ancient peoples of the world lived in nature constantly, not in front of computers or TVs or phones, they were not disconnected like many of us today and so could understand nature in ways that would evade us. 
   

Why former Christians have the worst understanding of the scriptures

I love to rip on everyone, don't take it personally.

This is in response to a few misunderstood scriptures also taken out of context by a former fundamentalist.



On when Christ spoke about the fig tree: 

U don't understand that the fig tree is a symbol of bearing fruit and not bearing fruit. That what you are in your heart is what you bear. And if your heart is fruitless, it may always be fruitless. 

U really don't get anything that was said, wow. I'm all for your mentioned scientists, but you should try to understand the words in context of when and how they were written like all words.

On Europe not washing their hands and dying. Why didn't god warn them to wash hands:

Matthew 15:
  “Why don’t your disciples obey what our ancestors taught us to do? They don’t even wash their hands before they eat. These pharisees wanted to know why Jesus did not do this and therefore we can conclude they did. They were taught this in the Levitical laws, which by your fundamental upbringing you certainly have missed. Was it god? Maybe not...but the Jewish people weren't stupid. 

It was Europe, who rejected Jewish teachings who suffered from the above. God's plan? No. But rejection of what was already taught. 

On all the mixing of Leviticus prohibited:

What harm could it bring to mix grains? Grains have been known to overgrow one another and then destroy the weaker gene. This makes one grain extinct. 

The sanitation of today was different from then. Pig and shrimp did kill. They are bottom dwellers, eating anything. It is unsanitary. 

Linen and wool is not because of fashion. One is made from animal and the other of plant. Much of the mixing (of various things in the laws) could be said to symbolize mixing of faiths or relating to the story of Cain and Abel where one brought wool and the other plant...but practically Jewish people had reasons for things and many times these have a scientific correlation or moral correlation (or at least what was moral for the time). 

The passage has to do with SEWING the two together, not wearing the two together. It is like saying what nature has produced, I will make better. And what a wonderful job man has done. 

Can we say Factory Farming. 


The stories in Genesis don't belong to Christians. They are Mesopotamian stories. Egyptians, Assyrians, Sumerians and Hebrews all had them. People didn't tell truths in fact, fact, fact, fact format like you are used to today.

You have to understand HOW they wrote. 

Truths are told, though something is not factual. 

FYI: Most of the Genesis account can be found in Mesopotamia from the possible Tower of Babel, to the possible Garden of Eden. Stories began because something actually did happen and they wanted to convey the truth of what happened.

Also- images and pictures are a very important literary device. The picture you form in your head when you read Tree of Life is very interesting and can be understood even by a child. Do you see the tree? Now, go read Darwin's Origin of the Species. "

What does Nothing have to do with it?

In Genesis 1 we find 3 interesting Hebrew words.

Create= Bara

Make=   Asah

Form=   Yatsar

I do not see bara and asah and yatsar as having the same meaning. They are similar, but they are not the same.

We can look at the differences between create and make in English to see this simply. A creator of a new design will create. I created a story. It is something original, no one else can do or have done and it is something new. 

However, I will make a house or make a book. This simply means using the processes familiar to everyone. Nails, wood, hammer and I can make my house. OR with paper, a type writer and binding material I can make my book.

If I create my own house design, then it is new and original and only I can do it and did it. 

I agree Bara is unique because it is something only God can do, but while I agree this is for significance I feel the significance is found in the spiritual side of things. It is significant because of its spiritual significance. 

I also find it very interesting three verbs at once Bara and Asah and Yatsar are used for animals and humans. This is not the case for anything else in Genesis 1. Bara and Yatsar are only used for animals and humans as well. 

BARA is not used for anything else other than animals, humans and then in the first summary. For myself this is as the spiritual summary of importance, but also as the first spiritual act.

This makes sense logically to me because before the Physical world existed, what existed? I would say the Spirit of God. So, if only the spirit of God existed, then how can anything else occupy its space?

Space has to be formed for the physical world to exist inside of. So, the question becomes how?

For myself it is simple. The spirit must perform the first act of self sacrifice and close itself and in this closing a void is formed to allow for a space for the physical world. This void to me I would call nothing —but what I mean by nothing is not the non-existence of everything, because I don’t think true non-existence or absolute nothingness exists.

What it is, is Chaos———the chaos of all the natural energy. Not the spiritual energy. 

What I think is that this “nothingness” that was formed in fact is the bubbling chaotic mess of virtual particles which scientists have detected. Yes, nothingness doesn’t exist, but this in fact what nothingness is. 

What is essential to me in chapter 1, verse 1 is that we do NOT see God making or creating or even using His words to bring this CHAOS -TOHU- into existence. It already was. It just is in the very first line. WHY?

For myself it is clear, because it is the consequence of the first spiritual act. 

Everything goes from a lower energy state of random chaos into a higher energy state of non-random and ordered appearances. 

We also see the word evening also meaning Chaos in Hebrew. the Hebrew of ‘evening’ (VAYEHI EREV) and ‘morning’ (BOKER, BIKO- RET) can be understood as ‘chaos’ and ‘order’. Everything is going through a process of chaos first and then order. From invisibly into visibility. 

Bara is the spiritual act. BUT, in a sense it is nothingness too! Just not as you and most people think of it. When we say nothingness, and I think when God creates from nothingness, what that means is in fact from NO THINGS. Which means it is spiritual, it is unseen, it is not natural.

The other way to create is by using things, or information. So Nothingness in this sense, is a physical nothingness, not an absence of all things and thus spiritual. I see this in a similar way to Rabbi Ramban. However, he does not make the link between No Thing and the Spiritual as being the same thing and I don’t think he understood the physical nothing as essentially the natural energy of everything -just in its most broken down fundamental form. But to me this is very much what nothing is. All the natural energy broken down into its most simple form. 

So this to me is the major difference between Bara and Asah. To create is to create something new, original and with spiritual significance. It is to form from nothing, because the spirit is NO THING. However, when we start seeing things, the natural, the physical is when we see ASAH appear. This is because to make things, you need things. 

Things are built from Simple to Complex. From Random to Non-Random. From Physical Nothing (which is a chaos of virtual particles) into Something. This is the process.  

But when we run into No Thing we also run into the Spirit.