Ron, I love a challenge. ;-) and I reall don't want to fuel a religious debate, especially in this forum, but I have a couple of comments (astronomy related) and I also believe that your post needs a correction or two: 1. I've always been fascinated by the references in Genesis to "lights." Consider also that the rainbow was apparently never observed until after the flood and you have some food for thought, indeed. Anyone have other thoughts/theories? 2. God is consistently referred to as "Father" in both the old and new testaments. I've always thought that "father" was gender-specific, i.e. male. 3. Isn't Jesus of Nazareth/Jesus Christ the offspring of God? 4. I agree - the whole Mary cult thing is a relatively recent development in Catholic theology. 5. You lost me here. And finally, back to astronomy: happy or merry Hannukah, Christmas, Dies Natalis Solis Invicti - and/or solstice. Kim -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of RON VANDERHULE Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 1:44 AM To: utah-astronomy Subject: [Utah-astronomy] some misconceptions,was "own" Sorry Patrick but I need to push the o.t. envelope a little just to clear up some confusion introduced by some members who don't know any better. Any follow-up can be done w/me personally. (but there might be enough astronomical references here to keep it viable) 1) < Genesis states the sun is not a star> Actually Gen. 1:14-18 uses the term "lights" for all the objects God put in the heavens. Even the sun and the moon are referred to as only "lights" in that chapter. Giving a title or + name such as "sun" or "moon" to these objects is strictly a pagan notion. The term "sun" is not used until Gen.15:12. 2) <God is neither male nor female > True enough. The male gender designation used for God in the bible catered to the patristic nature of the culture to whom it was written. 3) <Can God reproduce > No, that would mean "other gods" and Judaism and biblical Christianity are monotheistic. Duet. 6:4 Isaiah ch 44 & 45 etc. 4) <Mary was without sin> This notion was introduced by the Catholic Church in the 13th century and there has always been deep division concerning this doctrine within the Catholic church. In Luke 1:46 Mary calls God "her Savior" and in biblical parlance only a sinner needs a Savior. 5) To Dave Gary who "generally shuns supernatural explanation for things" begs the question; what is supernatural and what is natural? Our total knowledge of the natural world probably constitutes a fraction of one percent of all there is to know about it. What is the true nature or light? How do stars and galaxies "really" form? What is "life"? What massive, fortuitous, and precise chain of events transformed early life forms from asexual to bisexual? And need I mention quantum mechanics? Depending on a persons worldview much of what I just mentioned has no naturalistic explanation. So considering our dearth of knowledge of the natural world lets not be swift to judge what is termed supernatural ( a word not found in the Bible btw). It could be just another thing lacking an explanation. These events do have historical context after all. Finally lets consider the "Law" of Cause and Effect. The cause of time is eternal, the cause of power is all powerful the cause of knowledge is all knowing and the cause of the natural is supra-natural. Merry Christmas Ron _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3292 - Release Date: 12/01/10