Question about Gen 1

[TDiGaetano]

In Gen 1:14-19

*14 And God said: Let there be lights made in the firmament of heaven, to divide the day and the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years: 15 To shine in the firmament of heaven, and to give light upon the earth. And it was so done. 16 And God made two great lights: a greater light to rule the day; and a lesser light to rule the night: and the stars. 17 And he set them in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth. 18 And to rule the day and the night, and to divide the light and the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and morning were the fourth day. *
I can understand the Greater Light being the Sun.

But when it comes to the Lesser light people refer to this as the Moon. I know it doesn’t make much difference what it is but the Moon can be seen during the Day and at night it may not be Seen and it doesn’t produce Light just reflects the Light from the Sun.

I was wondering if The Lesser Light actually refers to the Moon or if it refers to the North Star. Since the North Star is always in the sky its position in relation to other stars show sesons it only comes out at Night and it was used by many early humans as a means to navigate at night.

I understand that the further south you go you can’t see the North star but this is written pre flood. Today Scientist have said that the earth use to be one land mass discription of the flood seems to show that water could of broken up the land to the seperated continents we have today. But in the south they have the southern Cross that lets them find south since they can not see the North Star.

Maybe I’m looking into it to much but after the flood if people used the southern cross in the south for navigation isn’t that like a symbol from God for man to see that represents Christ before his comming?

 

[Verbum]

Hi T,

The Bible is not a work of science. It expresses ideas within the framework of perceptions that were current among the people for whom it was written. For example, in the book of Josuah, the sun is said to stop so that Josuah can keep on fighting. The idea is not to communiate that the sun moves around the earth but that God worked a miracle to help his people.

In the same way, you must not look for scientific exactness in what you find in Genesis. Instead you must concentrate on the message that God is the creator of all things, where he has given man a special position. We learn a lot about God in Genesis, for example that he pre-exists all things, that he is a person and not just a force. We learn that, notwithstanding man’s failings Good will ultimately triumph over Evil and man will be part of that triumph.

Verbum

 

[bogeydogg]

I don’t know if the RCC subscribes to it but within Protestant circles there is what is called a Doctrine of Accommodation. I am sure it probably is a RCC doctrine since I have discovered that a great Protestant Doctrines I hold near and dear are in fact RCC Doctrine which has a lot to do with why I am now attending a RCC Church.

Anyway…

As I understand it, the idea is that God reveals truth in a way in which the people receiving said truth can understand it. For example, if God began to break down to Moses, a man who had experience in the Sciences of Astronomy, Cosmology, Physics, Astrophysics, the intricacies of how He built the universe one sub-atomic particle at a time Moses would not have understood anything he was being told. So instead God gave to Moses truth in a framework which Moses could understand but not with every detail which could have been added.

It is interesting to note that order given in Genesis, that the universe did begin to exist, that there was some sort of chaotic disorder after creation, that once order began light soon followed with protostars and galaxies and the like, followed by the creation of galaxies, planets, and then the beginnings of life in the seas, then plants on land, then insects, then birds and reptiles, then all the mammals then us. The Book is remarkably accurate insofar as it goes and as such I think argues well for itself without being a specifically scientific textbook.

 

[bogeydogg]

It is also worth pointing out that the people who complain about references in the Bible which speak of above, below, the corners of the earth, the sun moving across the sky, probably don’t complain when their local weather person tells them at what time the sunrise will be tomorrow morning. After all, the sun does not rise at all, it doesn’t move, we do, but I don’t think the phone at the local TV network rings off of the hook after every single weather report.

The reason why is called phenomonological (did I spell that right?) language, which is language which speaks of things as they appear to be without actually referring to the way they are. Its a linguistic shortcut and those who make a big deal out of it are being silly.

 

[John_Hiner]

Laudatur Iesus Christus.

One of the significant insights offered in this passage is the disclosure that the Sun and other stars are *lights *and not *gods *or spirits. This is a major break from most views held by tribal peoples at the time of Moses. This passage is a basis for the Catholic understanding of physical sciences.

Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.

John Hiner