| 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) |