Reyginus Oya am all hears how do you want to explain light(visible) without the sun.

Dapo777:
Reyginus Oya am all hears how do you want to explain light(visible) without the sun.

Good of you. This is how we are going to go.

1.a. My problem is really with your reason for your sudden unbelief in God and not with my explanation for the existence of God or how Light can be without the sun.

1.b. For the purpose of indulging you further, and probably learning your reason, I will deal with the problem of Genesis Chapter one. I will also advise you to be wary of the fact that I am yet to take a stand so far on anything.

1.c. Now, before I answer you, you do this first because it was how we arrived here. You must be willing to explain to me, logically, how Genesis one proof the non-existence of God. For your own good, I advise you watch every word you use like they are mine.

Before we go ahead let me make the conditions clear.

2.a.On no account should you or any party interested in this discourse insult anybody.

2.b. You must respond to everything you come up with when I ask for examination and I will do too when necessary.

If you agree to all this then we can move on.

Reyginus:
Good of you. This is how we are going to go.

1.a. My problem is really with your reason for your sudden unbelief in God and not with my explanation for the existence of God or how Light can be without the sun.

1.b. For the purpose of indulging you further, and probably learning your reason, I will deal with the problem of Genesis Chapter one. I will also advise you to be wary of the fact that I am yet to take a stand so far on anything.

1.c. Now, before I answer you, you do this first because it was how we arrived here. You must be willing to explain to me, logically, how Genesis one proof the non-existence of God. For your own good, I advise you watch every word you use like they are mine.

Before we go ahead let me make the conditions clear.

2.a.On no account should you or any party interested in this discourse insult anybody.

2.b. You must respond to everything you come up with when I ask for examination and I will do too when necessary.

If you agree to all this then we can move on.

I also have a condition,you must give me a direct and straightforward answer that actually answer my questions without evading my questions

Deal?

this is going to be interesting

Dapo777:


I also have a condition,you must give me a direct and straightforward answer that actually answer my questions without evading my questions

Deal?

Deal, as long as I understand your questions enough to answer them.

Reyginus:
Deal, as long as I understand your questions enough to answer them.

What If you act like you don't understand and use that as an excuse not to answer them?

Then If that happens I would have to break some rules. How do I know you Really don't understand?

Dapo777:


What If you act like you don't understand and use that as an excuse not to answer them?

Then If that happens I would have to break some rules. How do I know you Really don't understand?

Lol. I won't. This is how you know. If I ask for clarification, I must indicate where it is needed. Whether in the words or their logical and structural construction. If I still fail to understand, you go further to ask how I understand it and you tell me the wrong in how I understand it. At this point, you've done enough.

Let me also add. On no account is it good for arguing these things to win. The issue of breaking the rules once you perceive I did is not morally good. You don't abide by a good law because another person abides by it.

Now, tell me, what is the irrational thing that you discovered that pointed to the non-existence of God? Choose your words carefully.

Reyginus:
Lol. I won't. This is how you know. If I ask for clarification, I must indicate where it is needed. Whether in the words or their logical and structural construction. If I still fail to understand, you go further to ask how I understand it and you tell me the wrong in how I understand it. At this point, you've done enough.

Let me also add. On no account is it good for arguing these things to win. The issue of breaking the rules once you perceive I did is not morally good. You don't abide by a good law because another person abides by it.

Now, tell me, what is the irrational thing that you discovered that pointed to the non-existence of God? Choose your words carefully.

There are more than one impossible things and irrational things in the Bible that points to the non existence of Yahweh.

When I saw God I mean Yahweh. Agreed?

Dapo777:


There are more than one impossible things and irrational things in the Bible that points to the non existence of Yahweh.

When I saw God I mean Yahweh. Agreed?

Lol. Agreed. I thought we are all out for Genesis Chapter 1. The reason I asked you to choose your words carefully. But, no problem, I am still in.

Agreed.

Reyginus:
Lol. Agreed. I thought we are all out for Genesis Chapter 1. The reason I asked you to choose your words carefully. But, no problem, I am still in.

Agreed.

We also have to agree that everything the Bible says about Yahweh is true about yahweh since every Christians believes So.

Agreed?

Dapo777:


We also have to agree that everything the Bible says about Yahweh is true about yahweh since every Christians believes So.

Agreed?

Yes but how you understand it is another thing.

Reyginus:
Yes but how you understand it is another thing.

Ok in the book of Genesis 1:3-4
And God said let there be light and there was light. God saw that the light was good and he separated the light from darkness.

Now What this obviously means is that God created visible light before creating the sun because not in anywhere in verse one or two was the creation of sun mentioned.

Since it is not possible to have visible light through natural means without the sun ,and If you mention Aurora, Aurora is caused by geomagnetic disturbances, I presume When God created the earth it was perfect,So having geomagnetic disturbances is ruled out,because the presence of Aurora doesn't support a "perfect" earth as God created it in the beginning.

Now that I have established the fact that they can't be light without the sun,Genesis 1:3-4 completely destroys the possibility of the existence of a God creating light before the sun.

Dapo777:


Ok in the book of Genesis 1:3-4
And God said let there be light and there was light. God saw that the light was good and he separated the light from darkness.

True.

Dapo777:
Now What this obviously means is that God created visible light before creating the sun because not in anywhere in verse one or two was the creation of sun mentioned.

God created light, my friend, and not visible light. You may read your quote.

Dapo777:


Since it is not possible to have visible light through natural means without the sun ,and If you mention Aurora, Aurora is caused by geomagnetic disturbances, I presume When God created the earth it was perfect,So having geomagnetic disturbances is ruled out,because the presence of Aurora doesn't support a "perfect" earth as God created it in the beginning.

Lolol. My friend knows what he is doing. At this point, Dapo, it would have been reasonable to explain your Aurora if actually the bible told us that God created visible light.

The bible didn't specify that the light created was visible light, the reason this point falls flat. Light is not necessarily a product of the reaction with the sun alone. The form of light the sun produces is a type of light and does not translate to the sun being solely light. There are infrared and light from X-rays. The premise from which your argument is built is faulty. I will help you here by advising you to read Chapter 1 Verse 14.

Dapo777:

Now that I have established the fact that they can't be light without the sun,Genesis 1:3-4 completely destroys the possibility of the existence of a God creating light before the sun.

Very easy. Wow! And the switch from visible light to light. The contradiction created. But there can be light without the sun, my friend. So, let's move to your next verse and like you would say, I have completely destroyed the impossibility of the existence of a God.

Reyginus:
True.

God created light, my friend, and not visible light. You may read your quote.

Lolol. My friend knows what he is doing. At this point, Dapo, it would have been reasonable to explain your Aurora if actually the bible told us that God created visible light.

The bible didn't specify that the light created was visible light, the reason this point falls flat. Light is not necessarily a product of the reaction with the sun alone. The form of light the sun produces is a type of light and does not translate to the sun being solely light. There are infrared and light from X-rays. The premise from which your argument is built is faulty. I will help you here by advising you to read Chapter 1 Verse 14.


Very easy. Wow! And the switch from visible light to light. The contradiction created. But there can be light without the sun, my friend. So, let's move to your next verse and like you would say, I have completely destroyed the impossibility of the existence of a God.

Hold it right there before you start jubilating at a lost battle.

How can God separate light from darkness If it wasn't visible?

If you say the light might not be visible then you must agree that God can't separate invisible light from darkness,that would not be possible unless If the light is VISIBLE.

True or false?

Even chapter 14 further supports my claim that the light the Bible was talking about is visible.
And let there be light in the expanse of the sky to separate day from night and let they be signs to mark seasons days and years.

I ask you again Reyginus can an invisible light be used to separate day from night.

It's not until it is stated "visible light" before we can deduce that the light the Genesis us talking about is visible. Cmon.......... you are intelligent, do I have to spell this out to you for the sake of argument?

Incase u might be pondering why "visible" wasn't mentioned.
The person that wrote Genesis being an ancient person he/she didn't know some lights are invisible(lack of adequate scientific knowledge). So there was no need to put visible there because he/she thought every light was visible.

Also, in case u want to say the "stars" could be the source of light,that would be invalid in this case,because the stars were also created after the mysterious light appeared not before it appeared.

Dapo777:
Even chapter 14 further supports my claim that the light the Bible was talking about is visible.
And let there be light in the expanse of the sky to separate day from night and let they be signs to mark seasons days and years.

I ask you again Reyginus can an invisible light be used to separate day from night.

It's not until it is stated "visible light" before we can deduce that the light the Genesis us talking about is visible. Cmon.......... you are intelligent, do I have to spell this out to you for the sake of argument?

Chapter 1 Verse 14, you mean? Let me help your understanding, friend.

God created the stars, of which the sun is a part, differently from his creation of the first light. You'd wonder why he had to create light again if the current light is visible enough. I will break it down.

In the beginning, it was all dark, as the spirit of God hovers all over the surface of the earth. To neutralize the darkness and begin his creation he had to neutralize the efficacy of the dark earth by introducing other forms of light. The human eye is not capable of seeing this 'invisible light' but that doesn't apply to the eyes of God. To understand this, you must consider first that if these lights actually exists and operate, the uncaused cause responsible for existence must have caused them. And it is not possible not to know what we created.
A commonsensical approach to see this is to consider Verse 14. If the actually the light created in the beginning was visible to the human eye why was the creation of the stars, of which the sun is a part, in verse 14, come again?

The logical explanation is that one, the first was a tool to separate the dark, the reason the dark part after the separation was called darkness, and the light creating the difference day, while the other one, was created to necessitate the easy detection of things by animals.

It is more of a problem of translation, I think. The author not knowing what to describe such a light as due to the absence of knowledge of it then. Surely, he knows it is not the same light we know if not he wouldn't have written verse 14.

Dapo777:


Hold it right there before you start jubilating at a lost battle.

How can God separate light from darkness If it wasn't visible?

If you say the light might not be visible then you must agree that God can't separate invisible light from darkness,that would not be possible unless If the light is VISIBLE.

True or false?

Lol. Do you really think that we call invisible light is really invisible?

Reyginus:
Chapter 1 Verse 14, you mean? Let me help your understanding, friend.

God created the stars, of which the sun is a part, differently from his creation of the first light. You'd wonder why he had to create light again if the current light is visible enough. I will break it down.

In the beginning, it was all dark, as the spirit of God hovers all over the surface of the earth. To neutralize the darkness and begin his creation he had to neutralize the efficacy of the dark earth by introducing other forms of light. The human eye is not capable of seeing this 'invisible light' but that doesn't apply to the eyes of God. To understand this, you must consider first that if these lights actually exists and operate, the uncaused cause responsible for existence must have caused them. And it is not possible not to know what we created.
A commonsensical approach to see this is to consider Verse 14. If the actually the light created in the beginning was visible to the human eye why was the creation of the stars, of which the sun is a part, in verse 14, come again?

The logical explanation is that one, the first was a tool to separate the dark, the reason the dark part after the separation was called darkness, and the light creating the difference day, while the other one, was created to necessitate the easy detection of things by animals.

It is more of a problem of translation, I think. The author not knowing what to describe such a light as due to the absence of knowledge of it then. Surely, he knows it is not the same light we know if not he wouldn't have written verse 14.

Do you know What you are doing now? You are just trying to find your way around something that is obviously clear.

Read verse 5: God called the light "DAY'" and the darkness "NIGHT" Please how difficult is it to understand and interpret this?

If you say the first light was only visible to God But not man,how come it was called "DAY"?

So an invisible light can produce the characteristics of DAY?

Again I ask you Reyginus, can an invisible light produce the characteristics of DAY?

YOU are simple twisting the facts presented in front of you and trying to find a way out of it.

You said this argument isn't about winning but about discovering the truth Which is clearly not What you are interested.


How would someone agree that an invisible light can make DAY?
HIAN!!!!
Are you serious about this?

Let me also help you out.

The reason why the sun and stars was created after the presence of light was because, the ancient people noticed that everywhere doesn't go dark whenever the sun is not seen in the sky. So the logical explanation they gave to this is that there is another visible light independent of the sun light,because everywhere doesn't go dark whenever the sun isn't seen in the sky(like When the clouds are obstructing it),little did they know that the light they still see is actually from the sun even though it seems the sun was hiding behind the clouds at the moment.

Cappish?

Dapo777:


Do you know What you are doing now? You are just trying to find your way around something that is obviously clear.

Read verse 5: God called the light "DAY'" and the darkness "NIGHT" Please how difficult is it to understand and interpret this?

If you say the first light was only visible to God But not man,how come it was called "DAY"?

So an invisible light can produce the characteristics of DAY?

Again I ask you Reyginus, can an invisible light produce the characteristics of DAY?

YOU are simple twisting the facts presented in front of you and trying to find a way out of it.

You said this argument isn't about winning but about discovering the truth Which is clearly not What you are interested.


How would someone agree that an invisible light can make DAY?
HIAN!!!!
Are you serious about this?

No. It is not twisting anything. We have really come to associate visible light with light that can be seen with the naked eye but this is not true. Other lights can be seen too but for the fact that we need a tool to see them resulted in the term visible light. We cannot say that because we do not hear a sound that such sound is non-existent.

Let me introduce you to symbolism. The elements of this partitioning from total darkness are symbolized as day and night. The night representing darkness while the day representing light of any sort. To understand it better, connect it with verse 14.

Dapo777:
Let me also help you out.

The reason why the sun and stars was created after the presence of light was because, the ancient people noticed that everywhere doesn't go dark whenever the sun is not seen in the sky. So the logical explanation they gave to this is that there is another visible light independent of the sun light,because everywhere doesn't go dark whenever the sun isn't seen in the sky(like When the clouds are obstructing it),little did they know that the light they still see is actually from the sun even though it seems the sun was hiding behind the clouds at the moment.

Cappish?

Dude is trying with new materials. If you agree that this is true, why then do you have to hold that God is non-existent because he didn't create the sun before the light? Do you get the contradiction?

Dapo777:


Ok in the book of Genesis 1:3-4
And God said let there be light and there was light. God saw that the light was good and he separated the light from darkness.

Now What this obviously means is that God created visible light before creating the sun because not in anywhere in verse one or two was the creation of sun mentioned.

Since it is not possible to have visible light through natural means without the sun ,and If you mention Aurora, Aurora is caused by geomagnetic disturbances, I presume When God created the earth it was perfect,So having geomagnetic disturbances is ruled out,because the presence of Aurora doesn't support a "perfect" earth as God created it in the beginning.

Now that I have established the fact that they can't be light without the sun,Genesis 1:3-4 completely destroys the possibility of the existence of a God creating light before the sun.

GOD CCREATED LIGHT-SUN-DAY

THEN HE CREATED MOON AS A MEANS TO COVER SUN -NIGHT

SIMPLE GEOGRAPHY

Reyginus:
No. It is not twisting anything. We have really come to associate visible light with light that can be seen with the naked eye but this is not true. Other lights can be seen too but for the fact that we need a tool to see them resulted in the term visible light. We cannot say that because we do not hear a sound that such sound is non-existent.

Let me introduce you to symbolism. The elements of this partitioning from total darkness are symbolized as day and night. The night representing darkness while the day representing light of any sort. To understand it better, connect it with verse 14.

Man What are you saying?

You are So confused.

Let me help you out of your confusion by defining visible light for you. I got this definition from a website.

WAVELENGTHS OF VISIBLE LIGHT

All electromagnetic radiation is light, but we can only see a small portion of this radiation—the portion we call visible light. Cone-shaped cells in our eyes act as receivers tuned to the wavelengths in this narrow band of the spectrum. Other portions of the spectrum have wavelengths too large or too small and energetic for the biological limitations of our perception.

As the full spectrum of visible light travels through a prism, the wavelengths separate into the colors of the rainbow because each color is a different wavelength. Violet has the shortest wavelength, at around 380 nanometers, and red has the longest wavelength, at around 700 nanometers.

From the definition above. Visible light are lights that can be seen with the naked eyes without the aid of an instrument.

X-ray is light But we can't see it with our naked eyes,will you call X-ray a visible light because it can be detected by specialized instruments?

Again I ask you,can you call an X-ray visible light because it can be detected by an instrument?

There is a flaw in your argument. You said not every visible light can be seen with the naked eyes But Through the use of an instrument.

Please Reyginus give me an example of a visible light that can't be seen with the naked eyes But with an instrument.

I am waiting eagerly to discover this "mysterious" visible light of yours that can separate day from darkness and can't be seen with the naked eyes But with an instrument.

Reyginus:
Dude is trying with new materials. If you agree that this is true, why then do you have to hold that God is non-existent because he didn't create the sun before the light? Do you get the contradiction?

There is no contradiction in What I just said. I simple mentioned "the presence of light before the sun" is because that is What the Bible says,and I am trying to explain to you why the Bible says So. Its not because there is some kind of mysterious light that is only visible to God and Which can still separate day from darkness,But because the ancient people noticed light even after the sun goes behind the clouds,and the only logical explanation they had that time is that there was light created before God created the sun and stars. That explains it all to the ancient people and that explains it to you also.

We are in the 21st century But some people aren't thinking like they are in the 21st century.

Dapo777:


Hold it right there before you start jubilating at a lost battle.

How can God separate light from darkness If it wasn't visible?

If you say the light might not be visible then you must agree that God can't separate invisible light from darkness,that would not be possible unless If the light is VISIBLE.

True or false?

when God called the light good,what does it mean?
john 8:12
12 lAgain Jesus spoke to them, saying, m“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
when God cast the fallen angels and there master,satan out of heaven,they dwell in this earth,but by then the earth was not created,from heaven God has already called them darckness,so when God speak,he speak jesus(john8:12)

There are two types of light in the world. We can perceive one, or both, or neither! When we are born into this world, we perceive physical light, and by it we learn of our Creator’s handiwork in the things we see. However, although that light is good, there is another Light, a Light so important that the Son of God had to come in order to both declare and impart it to men. John 8:12 records, “When Jesus spoke again to the people, He said, ‘I am the Light of the World. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness but have the light of life.’” The allegory used by the Lord in this verse speaks of the light of His Truth, the light of His Word, the light of eternal Life. Those who perceive the true Light will never walk in spiritual darkness. We take a candle into a room to dispel the darkness. Likewise, the Light of Jesus Christ has to be taken into the darkness of sin that engulfs the hearts and lives of those who are not following Him.

malvisguy212:
when God called the light good,what does it mean?
john 8:12
12 lAgain Jesus spoke to them, saying, m“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
when God cast the fallen angels and there master,satan out of heaven,they dwell in this earth,but by then the earth was not created,from heaven God has already called them darckness,so when God speak,he speak jesus(john8:12)

There are two types of light in the world. We can perceive one, or both, or neither! When we are born into this world, we perceive physical light, and by it we learn of our Creator’s handiwork in the things we see. However, although that light is good, there is another Light, a Light so important that the Son of God had to come in order to both declare and impart it to men. John 8:12 records, “When Jesus spoke again to the people, He said, ‘I am the Light of the World. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness but have the light of life.’” The allegory used by the Lord in this verse speaks of the light of His Truth, the light of His Word, the light of eternal Life. Those who perceive the true Light will never walk in spiritual darkness. We take a candle into a room to dispel the darkness. Likewise, the Light of Jesus Christ has to be taken into the darkness of sin that engulfs the hearts and lives of those who are not following Him.

So God called spiritual light day? And spiritual darkness night?

Christians will always have to result to telling lies, fabricating things and DELUDING themselves when trying to use modern knowledge to explain primitive mythology. . .Why did the writers of genesis say that light was created before the sun?. . .because they did not know. . .Why did they say that the earth was in existence before the sun and stars?. . .because they did not know. . .Genesis creation account is Jewish mythology, who ever wrote it had no scientific knowledge and wrote what he thought was true. . .Jews take it to be an allegory, honest christians also say it is an allegory, a honest reading of the verse will tell you that who every wrote it got it wrong and doesn't know. . .STOP fabricating and making things up Reyginus. . .You are doing your religion and your god a dis- service because every body can see that you are trying too hard to sell what is just not there. . .

mazaje:
Christians will always have to result to telling lies, fabricating things and DELUDING themselves when trying to use modern knowledge to explain primitive mythology. . .Why did the writers of genesis say that light was created before the sun?. . .because they did not know. . .Why did they say that the earth was in existence before the sun and stars?. . .because they did not know. . .Genesis creation account is Jewish mythology, who ever wrote it had no scientific knowledge and wrote what he thought was true. . .Jews take it to be an allegory, honest christians also say it is an allegory, a honest reading of the verse will tell you that who every wrote it got it wrong and doesn't know. . .STOP fabricating and making things up Reyginus. . .You are doing your religion and your god a dis- service because every body can see that you are trying to hard to sell what is just not there. . .

Simple and straight to the point.

Dapo777:


Man What are you saying?

You are So confused.

Let me help you out of your confusion by defining visible light for you. I got this definition from a website.

WAVELENGTHS OF VISIBLE LIGHT

All electromagnetic radiation is light, but we can only see a small portion of this radiation—the portion we call visible light. Cone-shaped cells in our eyes act as receivers tuned to the wavelengths in this narrow band of the spectrum. Other portions of the spectrum have wavelengths too large or too small and energetic for the biological limitations of our perception.

As the full spectrum of visible light travels through a prism, the wavelengths separate into the colors of the rainbow because each color is a different wavelength. Violet has the shortest wavelength, at around 380 nanometers, and red has the longest wavelength, at around 700 nanometers.

From the definition above. Visible light are lights that can be seen with the naked eyes without the aid of an instrument.

X-ray is light But we can't see it with our naked eyes,will you call X-ray a visible light because it can be detected by specialized instruments?

Again I ask you,can you call an X-ray visible light because it can be detected by an instrument?

There is a flaw in your argument. You said not every visible light can be seen with the naked eyes But Through the use of an instrument.

Please Reyginus give me an example of a visible light that can't be seen with the naked eyes But with an instrument.

I am waiting eagerly to discover this "mysterious" visible light of yours that can separate day from darkness and can't be seen with the naked eyes But with an instrument.

I hope this calms you down. Since you asked for examples let me make it easy. Just feed on this.

Infrared is used in night vision equipment when there is insufficient visible light to see. Night vision devices operate through a process involving the conversion of ambient light photons into electrons that are then amplified by a chemical and electrical process and then converted back into visible light. Infrared light sources can be used to
augment the available ambient light for
conversion by night vision devices, increasing
in-the-dark visibility without actually using a
visible light source.

Maybe you would want to say that the light seen was not directly by our visible to which I may ask what then is it?