<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 1:00 PM, <<a href="mailto:T613K@aol.com">T613K@aol.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div style="font-size: 10pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial;"><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">
<div>
<div>
<div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">From: "Richard Wolpoe" <a href="mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com" target="_blank">rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com</a></font></div>
<font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">
<div><br>>>The reason I reject a literal 24-hour day for the first 6 days
is that by the<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>Torah's OWN account the Sun/Moon/Stars/Plents [iow our
clanedrical system!]<br>was not created until day 4. <<</div></div>
<div> </div>
<div>>>>>></div>
<div>I don't believe in literal 24-hour days for the first six days either, but
I must point out that what you say is lav davka. </div></font></div></div></font></div></blockquote><div><br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div style="font-size: 10pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial;"><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><div><div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><div> It's possible that until
Day 4 the atmosphere was so thick and soupy that the sun and the moon were
completely obscured, and they only became visible on the fourth day (or /would/
have been visible if there had been anyone there to see them) when the
atmosphere cleared enough to let the sun shine down onto the surface of the
planet. Rashi says the sun and the moon and everything else were created
on the first day and only put in place on their respective days of
creation. The sun being put in the sky on Day 4 could theoretically
mean it only became visible in the sky on that day.</div></font></div>
<div></div></div>
<div><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial" lang="0" size="2"><br><b>--Toby
Katz<br>=============<br></b><br></font></div></font></div></blockquote></div><br><br>True but this is not a literal read either. Remember it COULD be red that the first 3 days were a matter of secondes just as much as they could be eons. The point is the text TELLS us that the luminaries were created to MARK TIME. Therefore the first 3 days must be seen from a literary standpoint as A-temp[oral [non-temporal?] in OUR method of time measurement! <br>
<br>IOW if you read the text w/op BOTH Rashi and w/o any knowledge of Science - there would be little reason to pre-suppose a 24-hour day for the first 3 days.<br><br>Add to that that Seder Olm is based NOT upon Creation but upon Adam Harishon's life -span and then we have a different peshat in 5768.<br>
<br>Here is a drasha to justify my redundancy<br><br>Q: How is the first chapter of Breishis different than the entire remainder of Tanach?<br>A: ALL of Tanach deals with essentially one subject: the relationship between the Divine nad the human. Most ofBreishis one is merfely an account of creation with barely any Divine-Human inter-action [excpetoin the bracha given by HKBH to Humans]<br>
<br>And MOST of that remainder is the relationshipmore specifically between Israel and G-d, but Breishis/Noah plus Iyyov are exceptions. <br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br><a href="mailto:RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com</a><br>
see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>