Does Genesis suggest that God made light before the sun and moon?

Full Question

In the book of Genesis (1:14) it seems to suggest that God made light before the sun and moon; He makes them in the 16th verse.


Answer

In the first and second verses of the first chapter of Genesis we have a record of the state of the earth before the creation days. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” We are not told the length of time it took to prepare the earth prior to the creation days.

“The earth was waste and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

The state of the earth was darkness and it was covered with water. The record in Genesis re­lates to the earth. The sun had been in operation through the incalculable ages that preceded the six days’ creation. There is abundant evidence of this in the strata of the earth : our coal is a product of the stored up energy of the sun in ages past.

When God said, “Let there be light,” it was in relation to the earth. Whether the sun was lighting and warming the earth when God said, “Let there be light,” we cannot tell. Without the atmosphere which surrounds the earth we should not get light or heat. As we get up into the higher regions it is in­tensely cold. The atmosphere diffuses light and heat.

We are told that the second day’s work was the making of a firmament (expanse) and the dividing of the waters. The expanse is the atmos­phere which surrounds the earth. “And divided the waters that were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament.” If this expanse did not exist until the second day, the light would not be distributed as we know it.

The first day’s work was to divide the light from the darkness. How the earth was revolving and at what angle, is un­known. It has not always been revolv­ing as it is now. God set the earth spin­ning on its axis so that it completed a revolution every day. Half of the globe turned towards the sun, the other half away from it, so that half the day of the earth was light and the other half dark. “God called the light day and the dark­ness He called night; and there was evening and there was morning, one day.” (R.v).

“And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament. And God made two great lights.”

The word in the original translated “made ” is not the same as the word translated “created” in the first and twenty-seventh verses. “Made” (Heb. asah) is used to construct some­thing out of pre-existing material (see Gen. 8. 6 and Exodus 5. 16) and is used of man. ” Create ” (Heb. bara) is used exclusively of God in the Scriptures and signifies something that did not pre­viously exist (Psalm 51. 10; Jer. 31. 22; Isaiah 65. 18).

The sun and moon were not created on the fourth day but were made to work in connection with the earth, the sun to give light by day and the moon by night.


Responses

E. S. T. responded in The Testimony, Vol 4, No 48, December, 1934

  • It is always easier to criticise the opinions of others than to advance constructive suggestions of one’s own; hence it is frequently preferable to hold one’s peace rather than to utter criticisms which are merely destructive. I feel, however, that this is not the case regarding the answer to question 23. While I do not profess to be able to give a very convincing answer to the question which is there discussed, it does seem to me that the answer which is in fact given calls for some criticism. It is by no means easy to explain why the account in Genesis appears to suggest that the sun and the moon were created after light was in existence, but I submit that the answer given to your questioner does nothing to dispel the difficulties.

    In the first place, it is asserted that “the sun had been in operation through the incalculable ages which preceded the six days’ creation.There is abundant evidence of this in the strata of the earth; our coal is a product of the stored-up energy of the sun in ages past.” But if this is so, what are we to understand by the word “creation,” as used in this context ? Geologists are unanimous in teaching that our coal-bearing strata are a product of the decay of vegetation which flourished on the earth many thousands of years ago i.e., of vegeta­tion which was produced (in part) by the operation of the sun’s rays. But the argument used by your contributor seems to imply that after this coal had been formed God created the earth in six days, on the first of which He said, ” Let there be light “when in fact the earth must have been enjoying the light of the sun for thousands of years before this. This is to rob the word “creation” of all its meaning—a result which seems to follow from adherence to the dis­credited view that the earth was ” created ” about six thousand years ago : a view which is obviously irrecon­cilable with the statement that ” our coal is the product of the stored-up energy of the sun in ages past.”

    We are next confronted with this statement : ” Whether the sun was light­ing and warming the earth when God said ‘Let there be light’ we cannot tell.” But surely there cannot be two opinions on this point. Even a normally intelli­gent human being would not say “switch on the light” if the light were already switched on. How then can we suppose that the Creator said “Let there be light” if in fact the sun’s rays were already reaching the earth ? We are inevitably forced to the conclusion that the sun was not “lighting and warming the earth” when God said ” Let there be light.”

    The next problem, therefore, is to ex­plain how the sun could have been in existence without the effect of its rays being felt upon the earth. The solution advanced is contained in the phrase, “Without the atmosphere which sur­rounds the earth we should not get light and heat.” This, however, is untrue. The transmission of light has nothing whatever to do with the existence of an atmosphere, for even the elementary student of physics knows that light can travel in a vacuum. In fact, scientists tell us that light and heat travel through millions of miles of empty space before they reach our earth. While the sun’s rays warm up the earth, it is true that the latter then radiates its heat into the surrounding air and warms this;’ but if the surrounding air had not been in ex­istence the earth itself would still have been warmed by the rays of the sun although, of course, life, as we understand it, would have been impossible owing to the non-existence of oxygen. If, there­fore, the word ” firmament ” means the “atmosphere,” it is quite clear that the creation of the firmament was an essential preliminary to the creation of living creatures but not for the reason advanced in The Testimony.

    We are still left with the crucial problem of explaining the apparent assertion of the Scriptures, that the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day. I am not sure that I understand the ex­planation advanced to account for this difficulty, but the argument appears to depend upon the suggestion that, at this juncture, the motion of the earth upon its axis was in some way changed : “How the earth was revolving and at

    what angle, is unknown It has not always been revolving as it is now.” This may or may not be true, but it appears to me to be a purely gratuitous assumption; I fail to see how anyone can, with confidence, make a statement so dogmatic as this. We just don’t know. What we do know, however, is that light was created on the first day, and that “God called the light Day, and the dark­ness He called Night.” This seems to imply quite clearly that, from the first day onwards, the earth must have been revolving upon its axis in precisely the same way as it is at present just as anyone with a knowledge of scientific laws would suppose.

    The only possible explanation of the difficulty with which we are confronted would seem to be the rather hackneyed suggestion that, prior to the fourth day,the sun and moon had been obscured by a mist or vapour (the earth having been originally covered with water) and that, when this was dispelled, the hypothetical observer on the earth (from whose point of view the account is supposed to be written) saw the heavenly bodies in all their splendour. Unfortunately, however, there was no observer on the earth until the sixth day, so that this explana­tion seems to be a little lame.

    It appears that there is still much to be done to clear up the obscurities which the early chapters of Genesis contain, and it would appear to be necessary that we should all sit down and ask ourselves exactly in what way we are going to interpret them. Some of the difficulties will, I think, disappear if we are pre­pared to accept the view that the processes of creation must have been very much longer, and must have been begun at a far more remote period, than used to be supposed by religious people. But, when all is said and done, we shall be com­pelled to recognise the fact, which the Psalmist brings home to us so clearly, that the ways of the Creator are inscrut­able and that we can never hope to understand how the earth came into being. Would it not, therefore, be better if we ceased to concern ourselves with these somewhat unprofitable questions and concentrated our attention upon the understanding of the ” mysteries ” of the gospel of Christ?

W. H. Hill responded in The Testimony, Vol 5, No 50, February, 1935

  • The answer to your en­quirer was not a dissertation on " Crea­tion " or " Light." I believe that the first and second verses of the first chapter of Genesis are a record of the work of the Elohim during past ages, and account for the time, which, geologists tell us, must have elapsed for the develop­ment of what they find in the strata of the earth. It has been a gradual upward process, from the lowest to the highest forms of creation. It is an evolution which requires a power equal to the effects. Whether it be the lowest forms of life which existed in Lower Primary ages, or the higher forms of life of the Pliocene age, all that have been found are creations.

    "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." How long it took is not revealed, and science cannot help us to determine the time. But when we come to the six creation days, no reference is made to that which is found in the earth but only to that on the earth's surface. The chronicler of Genesis uses the word " created " (Heb bara) twice in the first chapter; "created great whales" and "created man." It is evident that the earth was not created in six literal days six thousand years ago.

    The rays of the sun must come through a vacuum or they could not reach the earth. The atmosphere is but a few miles above the earth. The rays come through 93 million miles of ether. If there were no atmosphere there would not be light, as generally understood, and which God called " day." Without the atmosphere, what would it be like ? Here is a quota­tion from an elementary student's book on Physics : —" The light of the sun is reflected in all directions by the particles composing our atmosphere. Thus the sinlight is diffused through the air, other­wise only the parts of the atmosphere which are in a direct line with the sun's rays woild be lighted up.. So all places out of the direct line would be darkness."

    Your correspondent says, " What we do know is that light was created on the first day "; the Scriptures do not say so.

    It is true that ever since God said "Let there be light" the earth has been revolv­ing on its axis in precisely the same way as at present, but at some time through the long ages of creation scientists tell us that it has not been revolving in the same way.

    I hope at some later date, if the Editors of The Testimony will allow, to show why I believe the six days in the first chapter of Genesis to be literal days of twenty-four hours. All that I have read of science is in harmony with the Bible, which says, " And there was even­ing and there was morning one day."

    I think with your correspondent that some of the difficulties will disappear if we are prepared to accept the view that the processes of creation must have been very much longer, and must have begun at a far more remote period, than used to be supposed by religious people, but I also think that if we try to make these days in Genesis long periods of time, then we increase the difficulties.

    Your correspondent is right when he says that these matters are not the highest or most profitable, but neverthe­less they are interesting, and our faith is strengthened when we find that God's works and His revelation are in harmony.