One question for Christians

[Statler Waldorf]

::Takes a bow::

Haha

We added nor subtracted anything. In the Genesis account, the moon is referred to as a light the same way the sun is. Can you prove that this is not the way it was meant to be understood?

If we use the definition of light then the Moon is just as much of a light as the Sun because they both illuminate. There is no qualifier in the definition stating that something that is reflecting waves of light cannot be called a light. I bet you’re a lot of fun to be around…
“Hey, nice red shirt!”
“My shirt is not red! It’s reflecting the red wavelength of light and absorbing the others so it appears red to you! But it’s not you fool!”

There’s a reason we use descriptive language.

The thing many people forget is that, when you break it down, moonlight is still the sun's light. Are we really going to argue about that?

Are you saying that AGU, NASA, and Nature all forgot that? I think it’s more likely they realize that simply because a source (like the Bible) uses descriptive language (such as moonlight) it does not mean that source is scientifically ignorant. I do not accuse NASA of being geo-centrists simply because they use the terms “sunrise” and “sunset”….do you?