There are some who pose a challenge of light existing before the
sun was created.
I think the problem is overstated
and easily rebutted.
When God created light, I believe
‘light’ is used as a synecdoche for the entire
electro-magnetic spectrum or perhaps the entire energy field of which visible
light is but a part.
In the order of
creation, I suspect that the energy ‘infrastructure’ must have been created
first or nothing would ‘work’, and it is separated from darkness (unenergetic
substance?) as a distinct thing in creation.
Thus light, as a
thing with real existence does not rely on it particular production at any
time, but must exist to be able to be produced by particular atomic activity.
It’s like saying
music could not exist before there were instruments on which to play it; however, its the other way: music had to be invented to be able to be produced by an oboe. Oboe without
music is just an elaborate tube.
Then, does the repetition of
‘evening and morning’ indicate that there were diurnal lighting variations?
Not necessarily. The terms exist
primarily as markers of time, not the names of lighting conditions. Just think
of evening in the Arctic Circle in July: ‘as bright as day’.
Stellar objects as markers of
time don’t appear until later, in Gen 1:14, so there are no ‘markers of time’
operating. There is no need for a temporary or supernatural light source as
there is no need for light with no one on earth during the first 5 days.
Nevertheless, to indicate the duration of events Moses tells us that the
evening and morning markers of time are chronologically relevant to the passing
of time in those first few days, and are calibrated by the v. 14 markers for
human use.
Simply, light and time passing
are two separate things, connected only with the creation of stellar objects.
Matt Strassler might help shine some light on what 'light' is really about.
