18 7

How did God create the sun on the 4th day? With no sun there is no days. This is the number 1 biggest reason why I don't believe there is a God or a higher power at all.

ThereIsNoGod10 3 Jan 17

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


The bible is extremely accurate when thrown at close range.


I heard it was a mistranslation of "period of time" translated to "day".

If you consider the whole universe as "the earth" in the story and "light" as the big bang, somewhat later comes large stars to die and or collide and give the matter you need to make planets, then somewhat later some hydrogen clumps up to make Sol and the proto Earth starts spinning as it accretes, and we get the first real "day", sort of.

So it's not all that bad of a story, coincidentally, given that it was mistranslated over and over again and the people who wrote it down were just making shit up.

That kind of seems like a trend though since they also mistranslated "young woman" as "virgin"

And the Hebrew word 'yom' is specifically a 24 hour period. It is the word used in Genesis. Hebrew contains other words for periods of time.


You cannot try to reason out the Biblical creation story as it's just that , a story told and written down by great story tellers. The Jewish people. It was their way of trying to make sense the world in those ancient times. And this story is not even original as it has earlier origins.


The biggest question is how you can convince a modern day person, this is somehow true? Yes, there are people who will argue that everything in Bible is the word of God and it is true. And, how do they know? Faith! I always wondered, how come God, could/would only speak to the people so long ago in the past?


what will be a god without an internal clock?


A religionist would say, "God's idea of a day is a mystery and unknowable to us and is a matter of faith." See, problem solved. 🙂

Actually our literal meaning of day is a 24 hrs period. It has nothing to do with sun.

@Srijith you had better pass that on to @ThereIsNoGod10


That's a good question. It seems like a major plothole.


Logical inconsistancies in a book written by humans refute your belief in a higher power? No offence, but that's a 'Does not follow' argument.


Just for giggles, divide the age of the universe, 13.7 billion years, into 6 equal "days" of 2.283 billion years. Our Greater and Lesser lights actually did fire up 4.6 GYA, in "day" 4.

Day 1 sees a universe starting at a zero point composed of matter, space, and energy.

Day 2 has a firmament - a round metal covering around matter. At +2.5 GY there would be enough iron for solid planets and a magnetosphere around solar systems. We observe a firmament around our solar system, we call it the heliopause/magnetosphere. It separates a fluid, high density plasma outside from low density plasma inside.

Day 3 has enough nitrogen from nucleosynthesis for plant life to exist somewhere in the universe.

Day 5 has enough phosphorous, selenium, magnesium, zinc, calcium, etc for vertebrate life.

But the fun part is that if you tell that to a creationist or other biblical literalist, they will go absolutely ape-shit.


In the prequel to genesis God made a calendar before the universe...with God magic. They just didn't have enough parchment to write genesis chapter -1.


So, Adam didn’t know that Eve was naked until he took a bite of that apple? I knew what a naked woman was as soon as I hit puberty!

balou Level 8 Jan 17, 2018

Thank gawd for Playboy.

@evidentialist I know, right?! lol


Your first question should be how did it create it self in order to form everything else.

Of course God did not create himself he always existed after he evolved from a monkey. I somehow feel awnry today.


It is all quite simple and beautifully logical. One of the things that went unmentioned in the genesis story is that The Big Dude, being supremely clever as all omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent guys are, knew before the whole show began that he'd need a timekeeping device to meet schedule demands, thus the first railroad watch was made. His Royal Smarty Pants also knew that he wanted to make a planet that revolved once in twenty-four hours which he would call a day and this notion of marking time with such device precluded the need for a sun at any particular point. See? Simple.

Checkmate, atheists.

See> easy peasy, works for me. lol


well thats that theistic god, agreed easy to debunk genesis, i do it all the time with bible thumpers. that does not address the deistic god. you won't get that by debunking the bible, though many theist tend to give deist arguments when the debate starts.


Well, the Bible tells you that God said that there is light, even before he thought he needed a sun for that. Maybe he had some huge flashlights, or he has set the atmosphere in flames. Who knows. But you are right, creating days and nights on the 4th day, makes it impossible to tell it's the forth day. For me it was something else, but this is a good one. Never thought of it.

Gert Level 7 Jan 17, 2018

A day equals one rotation of the Earth. So in fact, you theoretically could have a day without having the sun, but without the light/darkness cycle. Obviously we wouldn't be here to experience it though!

Jnei Level 8 Jan 17, 2018

We could, by referencing the Cosmic Background Radiation, which is thought to be (interestingly enough in this context) the remnants from when light was born out of the hot chaos after the big bang/inflation.


Those pesky details!


Only 24% of Christians believe in the bible literally.

So your complaint is no problem to the other 76% that don't take that passage literally.


What's wrong with allegory? I use them, and analogies, all the time when I'm teaching physics.

It goes back to that business of cherry picking. The more progressive christians have gone so far as to cherry pick reality by saying, "This part ain't right, but this one is -- and don't ask me why." Magical thinking hasn't disappeared, it has just been ... well ... rearranged a little.


So are we physicists wrong in using rotation as a allegory or analogy for electron angular momentum?

After all, the electron doesn't actually rotate ("that part ain't right" ) but it has angular momentum ("but this one is" ) and we don't really know what that property actually is ("don't ask me why" ),

In effect, electron spin is not taken literally, serves as an allegory or analogy. So you would say we physicists are "cherry picking reality" by using electron spin... or are we using an allegory/analogy that best explains a situation?

@TheMiddleWay -- Absolutely not. Dark energy, dark matter, spin, up, down, color are all place holders as you well know. There is nothing about it that is cherry picking reality. The only time our little 'stuffing words' are a real problem is when laymen take them seriously. Think things like, 'The universe is a _.' 'Entanglement is __.'

In the case of christianity, they are picking and choosing those elements of their holy book that apply to their reality in a very real way. 'Genesis is alegory, but the foundation of christianity rests upon believing in a magic man who gave his life for our sins, was resurrected, then flew off to the clouds to be with the other two Big Guys who are really all three just one.' In other words, don't believe the breathing into existence in six days or the talking snake business because it is basic bullshit to explain how Earth and all its inhabitants came about and fell into sin, but do believe the basic bullshit in this part because you ain't going to eternal paradise without it.' If ever we physicists do something like that, then you'd be right in this assertion. In the meantime, no.


Then what is wrong with genesis being a place holder and the only time it's a problem is when laymen take them seriously such as "The earth was created in seven days?" or "The talking snake cane about etc, etc"

It is you, my friend, that is cherry picking by projecting your belief that people view one thing as allegory and not the whole bible instead of viewing the whole bible as allegory....

...I mean, do you REALLY think Christians truly think they are drinking blood and eating flesh every sunday? lol 😉

@TheMiddleWay -- Oh, but they do - at least in essence. The Catholic church handles it through the mental machination of 'transubstantiation'.

“I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst . . . . Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.” (John 6:35,55–56)

Many evangelical churches seldom celebrate the Eucharist at all -- as infrequently as once a month or even once a quarter. Some have even dispensed with it altogether. But the Eucharist is not the point, just a minor distraction tossed out like a shiny bobble, but I'm no crow.

We are talking about beliefs here and how they affect ones view of reality, not place holders that are used for mere convenience. Mainstream christianity has come around for the most part in the acceptance of such things as evolution, cosmology, etc. but they hold rigidly to ideas that clearly lie in the magical thinking realm. The divinity of the Jesus character. Miracles. The Trinity. The soul. The list is too long, but the idea is simple. These ideas, all of them, lie outside the realm of known reality in a region called the supernatural and thus are not worthy of serious consideration by any thinking person unless motivated by information. Certainly not until sufficient support is provided for any information so as to warrant even a casual investigation.


"Oh, but they do - at least in essence."

Exactly. In essence. As in not literally.

"nd thus are not worthy of serious consideration by any thinking person unless motivated by information."

Not worthy of serious consideration to you. Keyword: you. You shouldn't tell others what is or isn't important to study nor what information they do or do not, should or should not have. For example, string theory is as crazy as any claim in the bible and it's 11+ dimensions quite literally lies outside the realm of known reality. I would never say that it's not worthy of serious consideration for if someone wants to take string theory seriously, have at it; maybe some day they or their successors will prove it right or wrong. Same thing with any divine claims... if someone wants to take them seriously, have at it; maybe someday they or their successors will prove it wrong or right by having done so.

So to bring it back to topic, it's not cherry picking because in all my time in the Christian church on three continents and a handful of cities, with all my past and current interactions with the religious, it has rarely been important if jesus walked on water or not; what has always been important is what jesus taught... ie, not the literal, but the allegorical. Not the historical, but the parable.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:16131
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.