Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Andrew & Debby Kulikovsky <hermeneutics AT kulikovskyonline.net>
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3
  • Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 18:01:33 +0200


On 08:16 PM 17/08/2002 -0400, Mike Sangrey wrote:
On Sat, 2002-08-17 at 17:18, Andrew & Debby Kulikovsky wrote:
<snip>
> This is not correct. There is no reason why you can't have time without light.
> I don't think you have understood Einstein - most people including many
> physicists don't!

I won't carry this discussion any further, but I'd rather the idea not
get dismissed with a simple "wave of the hand."

Perhaps I should have used the term `energy' instead of `light'.

Ok. That makes better sense.

With
only Mass and no Energy, you can't talk about the space-time continuum.
If you can't use space-time language (that is, you can't convey `tense'
using any linguistic feature), how do you describe the creation of
Mass? Well, you simply state it--just like Gen. 1:1 does. However, as
soon as you have Energy AND Mass in place, you can start using
space-time continuum language. You can start saying things like "that
which just happened was day one." You can't talk about a day zero thing
since the whole concept of `day' doesn't make any sense until you have
both Energy AND Mass in place.

I might add that the "evening and morning" language, used by the author
to stress a rather short time, can fit just fine when one assumes an
earth centric, gravitationally influenced, relativistic time. You've
got a really big ball of water; there would have to be gravitational
effects on time going on as the different pieces of the universe come
into existence through those first 6 days. It's really not that
difficult to postulate large variances in time between different places
of the universe as a result of the event horizon (or horizons)
shrinking. In short, the language of Gen. 1 is not scientifically
weird.

Funny you should mention this since physicist Russell Humphreys has proposed a cosmology exactly like this!


cheers,
Andrew
--
Andrew & Debby Kulikovsky
Check out my Biblical Hermeneutics web site:
http://hermeneutics.kulikovskyonline.net

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page