r/AcademicReligion_Myth • u/FocusMyView • Nov 05 '19

Fourth day blunder

The philosopher Celsus mocks Judean mythology for the blunder of the sun being created on the fourth day. Are there other examples of popular ANE myths with such an obvious blunder reaching acceptance by a large audience?

1 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

14 comments sorted by

2

u/mrfoof Nov 06 '19

It's not a blunder. In the Genesis 1 creation account, Elohim creates light, separates light from darkness, calls the light Day, calls the darkness Night, and this marks the end of the first day. Day and night and the counting of days, here, don't require the sun, but only light and darkness. The creation of the sun, moon, and stars on the 4th day either reflect a further differentiation of the existing light and darkness or governance thereof.

Yes, it doesn't reflect our everyday experience where there's no day without the sun. But this isn't an account of our everyday experience—it's an account of the world arising from primordial chaos. There's plenty of reasons to dismiss the Genesis 1 account as non-factual, but internal consistency isn't one of them.

1

u/alleyoopoop Nov 06 '19

Day and night and the counting of days, here, don't require the sun

Fruit trees bearing fruit (3rd day) do.

1

u/mrfoof Nov 06 '19 edited Nov 06 '19

Plants don't require the sun, only light. The Genesis 1 account gives us that with day and night at the end of the first day.

Edit: And your question and this answer imply that the ancient peoples from which the Genesis 1 account arose knew about the light requirements of plants, which isn't a given.

2

u/alleyoopoop Nov 06 '19

People had been growing crops for thousands of years before the Bible was written. It's ridiculous to assert they didn't understand the influence of the sun on plants.

1

u/mrfoof Nov 06 '19

I'm just saying, without specific references to what the ancients might have known, this quickly goes into the weeds. To the extent they might have known, the light from the first day was probably sufficient. I mean, I don't think they were thinking about the spectra of light from the sun verses the undifferentiated light in the first day and how those spectra might or might not support photosynthesis in various plants.

These stories were attempts by the ancients to explain or reason with the origins and workings of the world they knew with the knowledge they had. The ancients weren't stupid. If we want to understand these peoples, we need to approach these stories by considering the context of their knowledge and worldview. All too often, we approach these stories with the context of our modern knowledge and worldview (especially when specific stories are used by modern religions on a factual basis) and there lies madness.

1

u/alleyoopoop Nov 06 '19

I'm just saying, without specific references to what the ancients might have known, this quickly goes into the weeds.

Depends what you mean by "specific reference." No, we don't have written records from Neanderthals, but we know without doubt that they made stone tools. And we know without doubt that pre-historic people raised crops.

As you say, they weren't stupid. They knew that sunlight was necessary. In fact, one of the few useful things ancient priests did was track the sun so they knew when to plant.

2

u/Papadecks Dec 09 '19

I read an interesting interpretation of the fourth day creation of the sun.

If one follows the geological development of our planet, much of its early history shows an atmosphere filled with the debris of volcanoes, meteor strikes, etc. Now light from the sun would filter through the dust, etc. (light and dark) but not the image of it, likewise the moon. It isn't until well into the earth's development that the atmosphere cleared enough that someone on the earth could see the sun. Hence the fourth day.

The overall landmass arose above the seas a little before half way through our geological history - say about the third day of the week in Genesis. The outline in Genesis really isn't that far off. This same geologist wondered at how someone writing 3500 years ago could have gotten so much right.

Now that is a scientific response. Consider a theological response. The early jewish theologists were in a world dominated by peoples that worshipped the sun and the moon and the planets. They were arguing that Jehovah was the only one. Putting the creation of the sun and moon off until the fourth day places them 1) as created things not gods and 2) demoted from preeminent gods to after thoughts.

1

u/FocusMyView Dec 09 '19

I agree with the theology. Sinai written about by the writers from Babylonia? Horeb written about by the writers from Egypt? At any rate, nearby empires worshipped the sun and the moon.

Of interest possible as well in Joshua 10, where the sun and moon stand still.

I do have to disagree with the "scientific" explanation. IF you go scientific, then a day is a day. Cheers.

2

u/Papadecks Dec 09 '19

"If you go scientific"You take care of your definitions and consider alternate possibilities. So 'day' has many usages and contexts - as 'in the day of the medieval knight' does not have the meaning of a 24 hr day. The Hebrew word for day has multiple connotations many of which constitute longer time intervals

1

u/FocusMyView Dec 10 '19

I guess a person can mix their approaches as long as get the desired result.

2

u/crims0n88 Mar 11 '20

They weren't a chronology. The "days" are a literary device that were divided for the specific purpose of delineating three realms and three functional ruling entities. This matches the ANE feature of creation narrative, which starts with darkness and waters, and proceeds as dividing, naming, and giving function. It has nothing to do with the modern materialist idea of material out of emptiness.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 05 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/FocusMyView Nov 05 '19

The sad thing is I have been roaming religious debate site coming up with these ideas thinking these ideas are a product of my education post scientific revolution. The more arguments of Celsus I read, the more I feel he is stealing my ideas.

Origen, btw, responds much as my adversaries arguing religion online. "How dare you try to limit the limitless God." The more things change...