Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎But What is really important here?: No, they can't be long periods of time.
Line 125: Line 125:  
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:47, 13 November 2007 (EST)
 
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:47, 13 November 2007 (EST)
   −
You make some great points, but couldn't Genesis 1 be read as six periods, or creation steps instead of six literal days? Regards, Adam
+
You make some great points, but couldn't Genesis 1 be read as six periods, or creation steps instead of six literal days? Regards, Adam
 +
:No, it can't be.
 +
:# "Day" is defined as comprising an evening and a morning (i.e. an Earth rotation) (as well as a second definition of the daylight portion of a day).
 +
:# Each reference to the six days again references the evening and morning.
 +
:# The Hebrew word for "day" (''yom''), just like its English equivalent, never means anything other than a normal day when used with a number ("second day", "third day", "six days", etc.).
 +
:# Jesus said that man was made male and female ''at the beginning of creation''.  If the days were long periods of time, man would have been created very late.  Imagine a line representing a timescale of 14 billion years, and imagine where humans appeared on that timescale.  It would be indistinguishable from the end of the line.
 +
:# Making the days long periods of time would mean that plants (including fruit trees) survived for millions of years (if a day equals millions of years) without other life, including presumably bees to pollinate them.  Surviving two 24-hour days, on the other hand, is no problem.
 +
:#Adam was created on day 6 and lived through at least day 7.  How long could day 7 have been?
 +
:These are just the reasons I can think of off the top of my head.
 +
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:47, 14 November 2007 (EST)
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu