Comic








Others








Skepticism







Permalink

 

 

Updated every weekday.         Please vote!    

 

2009-07-20

This will probably come as a big shock to Fundamentalist Christians, but the Moon merely reflects light from the Sun—otherwise, the Moon wouldn't go through phases. Sure, Genesis 1:16 describes the Moon as a lesser light, indicating that it generates its own light, but I can assure you it doesn't.

Genesis 1:16 again states that God created the stars, in case you forgot. Note how the bible doesn't explain that the Sun is a star. This makes sense if you have the education of a Bronze Age scholar, but even school children of today know more about fundamental astronomy.

 

Comments

sara writes:

 

"someone should inform god" that cracks me up lol keep up the good work!

Veritas writes:

 

Now, now... We can't blame current day Christians for being told that ancient teachings are still supported by today's knowledge...

Kamatu writes:

 

BTW, where in the text do you see that the Moon has to generate light? Or are you going to tell me it doesn't shine as it reflects sunlight? Oh wait, is that possibly part of the distinction between "greater" and "lesser"?

TheAlmightyGuru writes:

 

Does the bible flat out say "The Moon generates its own light", no. But it does say that, "God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night".

I interpret this passage as claiming that the Moon generates its own light. I also think that, 3,000 years ago, such an idea would be justified.

Spectre100 writes:

 

by Kamatu's distinction, regarding reflection as generation, everything in the world 'generates' light. either way, someone still needs to inform god...

Blasphemy - a victimless crime writes:

 

If the moon merely reflects light, perhaps a better biblical description would have been that god made a greater light to rule the day and a lesser mirror to rule the night.

HeebAnon writes:

 

Kamatu, the Hebrew word used to describe the "lights" is "m'orot", which basically means "things that produce light". (More or less. I'd rather not have to explain the whole of Hebrew noun-forming grammar. It's complicated.)

Katy writes:

 

I have to say, it's pretty obvious that this is a creation myth that was made up by ignorant desert-dwellers trembling in their caves. Most religions are, you know - and most creation myths are just that - myths. Hel, I could come up with a creation myth just as good if I had to. *snort*

TheAlmightyGuru writes:

 

@Katy: Nice usage of "Hel". ;-)

Katy writes:

 

Thank you, thank you verry much. :-)

School Child of Today writes:

 

Yep.

SoapyCola writes:

 

Not most Katy, ALL religions are crap produced from people talking from their assholes and writing down what they dream/make up.

TheAlmightyGuru writes:

 

SoapyCola: Provided that your definition of religion doesn't require the supernatural, I think I could construct a decent religion based on the scientific method and using human suffering as a metric for morality. Granted it would still have dogma (which is undesirable), but it would be based on fact, thus, not bullshit. However, most people tend to call such systems "philosophies" rather than religions.

wm writes:

 

maybe he ment he seperated the light into tw
o?

wm writes:

 

i find that if a windo lets light into a home then it is described as "adding" light to the room... the windo isn't a sourse of light it's a sourse for the light to come through, like the moon, remember limited language,

TheAlmightyGuru writes:

 

@wm: First of all, I don't think you're looking at this passage from the eyes of a person living 3,000 years ago. Regardless, however, if the bible is to be regarded as perfect, then these failures of language shouldn't exist. God could have altered language to fix such an imperfection in his book.

Zack writes:

 

The mass majority of references to astronomical entities is phenomenological in the Bible. As such, the entities are described as they would be seen or noticed from a particular reference point, which is usually either one surface of the planet Earth or in space near the Earth. So really, there is no implication either way, as a mirror or as a light-producing entity. The text is too vague to justify either interpretation.

Zack (continued) writes:

 

However, we know from science which one is right and therefore how to avoid wrong understanding of the facts. One must take science along with the text in order to get the technical answer.

Pastor writes:

 

The Moon of bible and Quran

İn the holy Quran it proof that moon is taking the light from the sun and it tells that the day is being from the sun and the night from the moon so let we see with Quranic verses:
İn The Holy Quran:

By the Sun and his (glorious) splendor;
By the Moon as she follows him;
By the Day as it shows up (the Sun's) glory;
By the Night as it conceals it; Quran 91:1,2,3,4
It is He Who made the sun to be a shining glory and the moon to be a light (of beauty), and measured out stages for it; that ye might know the number of years and the count (of time). Nowise did Allah create this but in truth and righteousness. (Thus) doth He explain His Signs in detail, for those who know. The Holy Quran 10:5
Thou wilt indeed find them, of all people, most greedy of life,-even more than the idolaters: Each one of them wishes he could be given a life of a thousand years: But the grant of such life will not save him from (due) punishment. For Allah sees well all that they do. The Holy Quran 6:96
And He hath made subject to you the sun and the moon, both diligently pursuing their courses; and the night and the day hath He (also) made subject to you.
The Holy Quran 14:33

He has made subject to you the Night and the Day; the sun and the moon; and the stars are in subjection by His Command: verily in this are Signs for men who are wise. The Holy Quran 16:12
It is He Who created the Night and the Day, and the sun and the moon: The Holy Quran 21:33
Seest thou not that Allah merges Night into Day and he merges Day into Night; that He has subjected the sun, and the moon (to His Law), each running its course for a term appointed; and that Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do?
The Holy Quran 31:29
He merges Night into Day, and He merges Day into Night, and He has subjected the sun and the moon (to His Law): each one runs its course for a term appointed. Such is Allah your Lord: to Him belongs all Dominion. And those whom ye invoke besides Him have not a straw. The Holy Quran 35:13
And the Moon,- We have measured for her stations (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk.
It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).
The Holy Quran 36:39-40

He created the heavens and the earth in true (proportions): He makes the Night overlap the Day, and the Day overlap the Night: He has subjected the sun and the moon (to His law): each one follows a course for a time appointed. Is not He the Exalted in Power - He Who forgives again and again? The Holy Quran 39:5
Among His Sings are the Night and the Day, and the Sun and the Moon. prostrate not to the Sun and the Moon, but prostrate to Allah, Who created them, if it is Him ye wish to serve. The Holy Quran 41:37
The sun and the moon follow courses (exactly) computed; The Holy Quran 55:5


İn The bible:

and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so.God made two great lights the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." Genesis 1:15-17:
"When I snuff you out, I will cover the heavens and darken their stars; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon will not give IT'S light." Ezekiel 32:7:
The Hebrew word used for "light" is "owr" which means:

1) light
a) light of day
b) light of heavenly luminaries (moon, sun, stars)
c) day-break, dawn, morning light
d) daylight
e) lightning
f) light of lamp
g) light of life
h) light of prosperity
i) light of instruction
j) light of face (fig.)
But in those days, following that distress, " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give ITS light." Mark 13:24:
"Immediately after the distress of those days " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give ITS light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'Matthew 24:29:

also says that the moon is a source of light. "moon shall not cause her light to shine." Again this is another example of the Bible seeming to be inspired by man and limited to his own perception. Isaiah 13:10

İslamic Pastor writes:

 

if you want to know the one and the only truth its here in The holy book on this website http://www.kuranikerim.com/english/m_indexe.htm when you open the website click numbers and the names to open
and this
http://www.beautifulislam.net/tellmemore/true_religion.htm
and the miracles of the holy Quran is in this websites
http://www.islamicmedicine.org/medmiraclesofquran/medmiracleseng.htm
www.islam-guide.com
http://www.islamcan.com/miracles/index.shtml

TheAlmightyGuru writes:

 

The one and only truth will be discovered by scientists diligently working in a laboratory.

Your words are hollow, your ancient texts are violent and disgusting, and the only reason you can even post your cryptic scribbles is because science made it possible.

Bahookee writes:

 

Note: every time the moons light is mentioned the SUN IS DARKENED...hahaha why because the greater light can't produce the lesser light from the moon! That right the moonlight is a alight at night it is a source of light from a greater light. This isn't a contradiction. What is a contradiction is the Quran that shows the moon is a light 71:16 and the sun is a lamp? A light is energy a lamp just an object in need of a light energy! The moon in the Quran shows to be a greater light!

Bahookee writes:

 

What is in the night sky the sun? No the moon which uses lots OWN surface to emit light never does the light like the Quran says God created it own light but rather it's a lesser one and is also unable to use the suns light when the sun is what??? DARKENED duh as we understand we gain knowledge. Electricity was ALWAYS available even to the Egyptian they could have what electricity why didn't they? Lack of understanding same there! It's implied as we gained understanding of nature see faith leads science

TheAlmightyGuru writes:

 

The sun isn't "darkened" at night. What actually happens is the side of the Earth that the observer lives on has simply rotated away from the sun. Also, the moon isn't a "lesser" light. It isn't a light at all. It reflects the light from the sun, and it does this whether it's day or night.

As a believer of Genesis, it doesn't do you any good to insult those who believe the Koran. Both descriptions are primitive and inaccurate.

Searcher writes:

 

"..he made" at the end of the verse is not found in the Hebrew. And its very possible the "..also" is referring to verse 17 since verse 17 starts with "And" which is also not found in the Hebrew. So a more appropriate translation would read:
vs 16
"God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, the stars"
vs 17
"Also God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth"

TheAlmightyGuru writes:

 

@Searcher: That's a take on this passage that I've not yet heard. If that is the case, it would mean that Genesis 1:16 is ignoring the Moon entirely and focusing on just the Sun (the greater light) and the stars (the lesser light). This may be the case but I have a few objections:

1.) First of all, your claim about specific words not being in the ancient Hebrew is correct according to this source (http://biblehub.com/text/genesis/1-16.htm). Of course, as you can see from the direct translation, about HALF of the words found in the English translation don't exist in the ancient Hebrew due to the vagueness of the language. We could effectively change the meaning of nearly every passage of the bible if we took this approach.

2.) Every single English translation I've seen is worded pretty much in the same manner. Not that I have much faith in the translators, but they do appear to be in agreement that the final part about the stars is its own separate thought (http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-16.htm).

3.) Genesis 1:16, specifically says "two" (even in the Hebrew) lights a greater and lesser. It does not say "one for the day, and thousands for the night." Unless the authors thought that the stars were holes in a celestial globe (which many did), this indicates a reference to the Moon.

4.) Everybody at the time probably -did- think the Moon gave off its own light as it would have been common sense at the time. Our modern understanding of Earth orbiting the Sun and the reason behind the phases of the Moon would have been entirely foreign to literally everybody at the time this passage was written.

I find your interpretation interesting, but I have a hard time accepting it.

Van writes:

 

Why does the bible have to be translated. if 'god' can transend space and time and create things, then how is it so hard for him to be a able to come up with sentences and words that need no interpretation and vagueness for all of time as well, can he not control language of his creations? seems he is pretty limited, considering it took him 3 days to make the earth moon and sun and then 50 billion galaxies that we know of as an afterthought. I mean stars are just small dots in the sky for our amusement to make pictures out of connect the dots right.

it clearly states he MADE TWO great lights, one brighter than the other lesser, i dont see anything that states the moon is reflecting light from the sun, would it have been that hard to put in writing?? you can interpreate that drivel how ever you like, but again why would a supreme creator need to be subtitled eh, cant speak clearly enough or maintain language for even a few thousand years, maybe the dbags dead now? the logical explanation is this is the writting of a simple human with such limited knowledge of the universe.

IMO, a true supreme beings book would be full of scientific facts that would prove ultimate knowlege and that we can use to prove its true, instead all we get is, its just too much for us to handle and therefore its just a great mystery, lol whatever simpletons.

 

Oh the irony!