How did light exist without the sun during the first three days of creation week? Genesis 1:3–5 describes God’s creation of light on the first day of creation. God separated this light from the darkness and evaluated it as “good.” He called the light “day,” while the darkness was called “night.” Together, they made up the first evening and morning of day one of creation week. Evening and morning repeat on days two and three, but the sun isn’t made until day four. The Bible is silent about the source of this light. Nevertheless, this is a question that has been debated and speculated upon among scholars and theologians for nearly two millennia. Tertullian of Carthage (AD 155–220), in present day Tunisia, was an early Christian apologist and theologian. Tertullian believed that the light was a physical manifestation of Christ’s glory early in creation week, four millennia before the incarnation. However, it may not be the best interpretation to say this physical light in early Genesis 1 is explained by the light of Christ. Because God created the light, this naturally makes God the ultimate source by his power, but what was the specific source? Ephrem the Syrian (AD 306–373) was an apologist, hymnographer, and theologian in Edessa, Syria. Ephrem speculated that the first light was like a huge bright mist or a pillar of fire and that after day three had ended, God repurposed that light (and its heat) into the sun, moon, and stars. However, a problem presents itself here. The sun is like a pillar of fire in a sense—nuclear fusion fire that doesn’t need oxygen like fires on earth. So in this view, the sun would really have been made on day one, then slightly modified on day four. Yet we read that God made the greater and lesser lights on day four as well as the stars, which would render the making of things on day four seem almost redundant. Augustine of Hippo (AD 354–430), in present-day Algeria, was the bishop of Hippo and a prolific author and theologian. Augustine believed that the light on days one through three was specifically created (not a manifested essence of God) nor something that was later repurposed. He believed that God created angels on day one and that they were the light that shone on the earth for three days (likely based on scriptural references such as Psalm 104:4, Ezekiel 1:13–14, Matthew 28:3, Acts 12:7, and Revelation 18:1). We run into a subtle issue here. Angels are all spiritual beings (e.g., Hebrews 1:14). This brings us to a metaphysical question of how light from spiritual beings manifests itself as physical light in our universe. Ken Ham, founder of Answers in Genesis, is an apologist and staunch defender of biblical inerrancy. Ken does not take a position on what the light source on days one through three was but observes that it must have been a light source that shone on a rotating earth once the light and darkness were separated to functionally serve the same purpose as the later-created sun. Ken Ham’s goal is to take Scripture as written, and he believes that Scripture teaches a localized and temporary light source for the light of days one through three. There is no repurposing of this light as the sun on day four. As can be seen from the small sampling above, there are numerous views on this subject and all of them are based on accepting the Bible as the ultimate authority, then using theological inference from other portions of Scripture or from Genesis 1 alone to develop an explanation for what Scripture does not specifically state. Ultimately, we must admit that Scripture doesn’t satisfy our curiosity on this question but leaves us free to put forth possible explanations, as long as we acknowledge that we cannot dogmatically assert our favored hypothesis as “fact.” —Troy Lacey