Creation Days vs Natural Days

[NyawehNyoh]

.
● Gen 1:5b . . And there was evening and there was morning, a first Day.

There are two primary kinds of Days in the first chapter of Genesis. One is a creation day and the other is a natural day. It's very important to keep those two kinds of days distinctly separate in our thinking because they are as unalike as sand and gravel.

Creation days are a bit problematic because there were no sunrises or sunsets to be seen on Earth till the fourth day. And-- when you think about it --a strict chronology of evening and morning defines overnight; viz: darkness (Lev 24:2-4). In order to obtain a full 24-hour day, we'd have to define creation's Days as a day and a night rather than an evening and a morning.

In other words: the evenings and mornings relative to creation days aren't solar events. So it's very likely the terms are merely index flags indicating the beginnings and endings of unspecified periods.

Now, according to Gen 1:24-31, God created humans and all terra critters on the sixth day; which has to include prehistoric creatures because on no other day did God create beasts but the sixth.

However; the sciences of geology and paleontology, in combination with radiometric dating, strongly suggest that prehistoric creatures preceded humans by several million years. So then, in my estimation, the days of creation should be taken to represent eras rather than 24-hour events. That's not an unreasonable posit; for example:

"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven." (Gen 2:4)

The Hebrew word for "day" in that verse is the very same word for each of the six days of God's creation labors. Since day in Gen 2:4 refers to a period of time obviously much longer than a 24-hour calendar day; it defends the suggestion that each of the six Days of creation were longer than 24 hours apiece too. In other words: day is ambiguous and not all that easy to interpret sometimes.

Anyway; this "day" thing has been a stone in the shoe for just about everybody who takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of twenty-four hours apiece; so Bible readers end up stumped when trying to figure out how to cope with the 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g. Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the mass extinction events.

NOTE: Galileo believed that science and religion are allies rather than enemies-- two different languages telling the same story. He believed that science and religion complement each other: science answers questions that religion doesn't bother to answer, and religion answers questions that science cannot answer.

For example: theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking understood pretty well how the cosmos works; but could never scientifically explain why it should exist at all. Well; in my estimation, the only possible answer to the "why" is found in intelligent design; which is a religious explanation rather than scientific. Religion's "why" is satisfactory for people of faith. No doubt deep thinkers like Michio Kaku, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Michelle Thaller, and the late Carl Sagan would prefer something a bit more empirical.
_

[Rella]

.
● Gen 1:5b . . And there was evening and there was morning, a first Day.

There are two primary kinds of Days in the first chapter of Genesis. One is a creation day and the other is a natural day. It's very important to keep those two kinds of days distinctly separate in our thinking because they are as unalike as sand and gravel.

Creation days are a bit problematic because there were no sunrises or sunsets to be seen on Earth till the fourth day. And-- when you think about it --a strict chronology of evening and morning defines overnight; viz: darkness (Lev 24:2-4). In order to obtain a full 24-hour day, we'd have to define creation's Days as a day and a night rather than an evening and a morning.

In other words: the evenings and mornings relative to creation days aren't solar events. So it's very likely the terms are merely index flags indicating the beginnings and endings of unspecified periods.

Now, according to Gen 1:24-31, God created humans and all terra critters on the sixth day; which has to include prehistoric creatures because on no other day did God create beasts but the sixth.

However; the sciences of geology and paleontology, in combination with radiometric dating, strongly suggest that prehistoric creatures preceded humans by several million years. So then, in my estimation, the days of creation should be taken to represent eras rather than 24-hour events. That's not an unreasonable posit; for example:

"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven." (Gen 2:4)

The Hebrew word for "day" in that verse is the very same word for each of the six days of God's creation labors. Since day in Gen 2:4 refers to a period of time obviously much longer than a 24-hour calendar day; it defends the suggestion that each of the six Days of creation were longer than 24 hours apiece too. In other words: day is ambiguous and not all that easy to interpret sometimes.

Anyway; this "day" thing has been a stone in the shoe for just about everybody who takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of twenty-four hours apiece; so Bible readers end up stumped when trying to figure out how to cope with the 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g. Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the mass extinction events.

NOTE: Galileo believed that science and religion are allies rather than enemies-- two different languages telling the same story. He believed that science and religion complement each other: science answers questions that religion doesn't bother to answer, and religion answers questions that science cannot answer.

For example: theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking understood pretty well how the cosmos works; but could never scientifically explain why it should exist at all. Well; in my estimation, the only possible answer to the "why" is found in intelligent design; which is a religious explanation rather than scientific. Religion's "why" is satisfactory for people of faith. No doubt deep thinkers like Michio Kaku, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Michelle Thaller, and the late Carl Sagan would prefer something a bit more empirical.
_

    

Well thought out.

Will be interesting to see the replies.

[NyawehNyoh]

.
● Gen 1:9 . . And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

At this point, the Earth's surface likely resembled the topography of a billiard ball so it would remain entirely flooded were it not reshaped.

"He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved. You covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they fled; at the sound of your thunder they took to flight. The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth." (Ps 104:5-9)

That passage is stunning; and clearly way ahead of its time. Mountains rising, and valleys sinking speaks of magma pressure and tectonic plate subduction-- powerful forces of nature that keep the Earth's surface in a perpetual state of alteration.

Now, it's right about here that young-earth theorists have a problem because it's obvious from physical evidence that much of the Earth's higher elevations were inundated for a very long time before they were pushed up to where they are now.

Take for example Mount Everest. Today its tippy top is something like 29,029 feet above sea level. The discovery of fossilized sea lilies near its summit proves that the Himalayan land mass has not always been mountainous; but at one time was the floor of an ancient sea bed. This is confirmed by the "yellow band" below Everest's summit consisting of limestone: a type of rock made from calcite sediments containing the skeletal remains of countless trillions of organisms who lived, not on dry land, rather, underwater in an ocean.
_

[NyawehNyoh]

.
FAQ: Young-Earth theorists calculate planet Earth is no more than +/- 6,000 years old. They get that number by working with the Bible's genealogies beginning with Adam and his son Seth, and from taking into account portions of world history. Why do Old-Earth theorists dispute their results?

REPLY: We cannot know for a rock-solid, bullet-proof, verifiable certainty that the days of creation were no more than twenty-four hours apiece. In other words: it's very possible that those 6,000 years are merely a drop of pigment in a bucket of paint.
_

[Rella]

No debate?

I would love to use this in another forum but in seeking permission I find I am blocked to PMs

I think the idea is interesting.

Anyone?

[NyawehNyoh]

.
● Ex 31:16-17 . .The children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days The Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.

The Jews' routine sabbath is a calendar day; as such it is no more than twenty-four hours in length. However, the creation sabbath that the Jews' routine sabbath commemorates is very different.

Six of the creation days were bounded by an evening and a morning; whereas the seventh day isn't bounded, viz: the seventh day per Gen 2:1-3 hasn't ended. God has yet to pick up where He left off and continue making things for the current cosmos. In other words; the original sabbath has thus far been a perpetual, never-ending day.

That passage in Exodus is oftentimes appropriated by certain folks to prove creation days were twenty-four hour events. But that argument is very weak because the original sabbath day is on-going, and has thus far consumed quite a few more hours than that of a natural day.

The original sabbath day is a useful figure of speech in the 3rd and 4th chapters of the letter to Hebrews wherein it's used in a discussion of the Jews' future.

Their occupation of the promised land was intended to be permanent, but due to a failure of the people to move in and take the land when God instructed them to, many at that time missed the boat.

Messiah's theocratic kingdom-- described and foretold by the prophets --presents a second chance for the Jews to occupy that land permanently. However; numbers of Jews are allowing the opportunity to slip thru their fingers via their stubborn refusal to accept Jesus (a.k.a. Y'shua) as the monarch designated by God to govern the kingdom.
_

[Alan]

Anyway; this "day" thing has been a stone in the shoe for just about everybody who takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of twenty-four hours apiece; so Bible readers end up stumped when trying to figure out how to cope with the 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g. Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the mass extinction events.

_

This is definitely a point of concern with today's Christians. As science progresses and reveals more data, some Christians resort to building assumptions that place a barrier between science and religion, when in fact they should be complimentary to one another. 

IMO it is a radical version of science that sets out to disprove the existence of a creator, and maybe those that do have an axe to grind. Either way, anti-god publications have likely persuaded a few, but for the most part have simply shown an extreme bias and have failed to offer up any evidence. 

OTOH, religious zealots that create mythical scenarios such as God creating an Earth that is already 4.3 billion YO, that dinosaurs and humans coexisted, that a firmament surrounds our Earth and all claims of space travel are fabricated, or simply that the biggest goal of science is to disprove the existence of a creator. 

There is nothing in the bible that challenges the evidence and data that science has stumbled upon, or vice versa. 

[NyawehNyoh]

.
● 1Tim 6:20 . . Avoid impious and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Not all science is false. The kind we need to be wary of typically shows up in informal group discussions, i.e. forums, bull sessions, and brain storming; wherein people shoot from the lip without really knowing what they're talking about.

For example: one day at work a man in the break room said he believes it's arrogant to assume there is no other intelligent life in the universe but that found on earth. You know why he said that? Because he heard it said first by someone he admires, ergo: he was perpetuating a logical fallacy in the form of a credible opinion.

BTW: On June 28, 2024, The US Supreme Court overturned a long held opinion-- the so-called Chevron Deference Doctrine --which was basically an argument from authority, i.e. a logical fallacy which supposes that someone's position, or their credentials, makes their views more important and/or more likely to be correct than the views of lesser folks.

In a nutshell; just because someone is high up on the "expert" totem pole does not eo ipso make them right and/or worth repeating.
_

[Rella]

.
● 1Tim 6:20 . . Avoid impious and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Not all science is false. The kind we need to be wary of typically shows up in informal group discussions, i.e. forums, bull sessions, and brain storming; wherein people shoot from the lip without really knowing what they're talking about.

For example: one day at work a man in the break room said he believes it's arrogant to assume there is no other intelligent life in the universe but that found on earth. You know why he said that? Because he heard it said first by someone he admires, ergo: he was perpetuating a logical fallacy in the form of a credible opinion.

BTW: On June 28, 2024, The US Supreme Court overturned a long held opinion-- the so-called Chevron Deference Doctrine --which was basically an argument from authority, i.e. a logical fallacy which supposes that someone's position, or their credentials, makes their views more important and/or more likely to be correct than the views of lesser folks.

In a nutshell; just because someone is high up on the "expert" totem pole does not eo ipso make them right and/or worth repeating.
_

Permission please...

The Young Local Creation Week view

at https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/the-young-local-creation-week-view.2055/

They just started this and I am so impressed with your comments that I would like to either make a post or send them in a PM ... of course using you name for proper credit.

May I?

[Amo]

.
● Gen 1:5b . . And there was evening and there was morning, a first Day.

There are two primary kinds of Days in the first chapter of Genesis. One is a creation day and the other is a natural day. It's very important to keep those two kinds of days distinctly separate in our thinking because they are as unalike as sand and gravel.

Creation days are a bit problematic because there were no sunrises or sunsets to be seen on Earth till the fourth day. And-- when you think about it --a strict chronology of evening and morning defines overnight; viz: darkness (Lev 24:2-4). In order to obtain a full 24-hour day, we'd have to define creation's Days as a day and a night rather than an evening and a morning.

In other words: the evenings and mornings relative to creation days aren't solar events. So it's very likely the terms are merely index flags indicating the beginnings and endings of unspecified periods.

Now, according to Gen 1:24-31, God created humans and all terra critters on the sixth day; which has to include prehistoric creatures because on no other day did God create beasts but the sixth.

However; the sciences of geology and paleontology, in combination with radiometric dating, strongly suggest that prehistoric creatures preceded humans by several million years. So then, in my estimation, the days of creation should be taken to represent eras rather than 24-hour events. That's not an unreasonable posit; for example:

"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven." (Gen 2:4)

The Hebrew word for "day" in that verse is the very same word for each of the six days of God's creation labors. Since day in Gen 2:4 refers to a period of time obviously much longer than a 24-hour calendar day; it defends the suggestion that each of the six Days of creation were longer than 24 hours apiece too. In other words: day is ambiguous and not all that easy to interpret sometimes.

Anyway; this "day" thing has been a stone in the shoe for just about everybody who takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of twenty-four hours apiece; so Bible readers end up stumped when trying to figure out how to cope with the 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g. Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the mass extinction events.

NOTE: Galileo believed that science and religion are allies rather than enemies-- two different languages telling the same story. He believed that science and religion complement each other: science answers questions that religion doesn't bother to answer, and religion answers questions that science cannot answer.

For example: theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking understood pretty well how the cosmos works; but could never scientifically explain why it should exist at all. Well; in my estimation, the only possible answer to the "why" is found in intelligent design; which is a religious explanation rather than scientific. Religion's "why" is satisfactory for people of faith. No doubt deep thinkers like Michio Kaku, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Michelle Thaller, and the late Carl Sagan would prefer something a bit more empirical.
_

Exo 20:1  And God spake all these words, saying,..............
Exo 20:8  Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

So, I guess you suppose God didn't really say the above words, or write them with His own finger in tablets of stone twice as Moses testified? Moses lied? Or do you think God did say and write these words, and He lied? Or is all of scripture just stories or allegories for people to make whatever they wish of them?

Did God really make all of Israel obey a command concerning an event that really never happened as that command testifies, and back that command up with the penalty of death? Is this how God really is?

Psa 31:5  Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O LORD God of truth.

Psa 33:4  For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

Psa 119:142  Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.

Psa 119:151  Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth.

Are the above testimonies lies? Is God not a God of truth? Are his words not true? Is His law not truth? Are His commandments not truth? If not, then how can they be a standard? If so, then why would He lie or exaggerate about his power and the timing of creation?

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Is David's testimony above wrong? Did it really take long ages of time for God to create, or bring about creation through evolutionary processes, rather than as the above testimony suggests?

Gen 1:3  And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

Sounds pretty much like God spoke, and the thing was done. Not really that complicated, until some try to place their own ideas within it.

[Rella]

Exo 20:1  And God spake all these words, saying,..............
Exo 20:8  Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

So, I guess you suppose God didn't really say the above words, or write them with His own finger in tablets of stone twice as Moses testified? Moses lied? Or do you think God did say and write these words, and He lied? Or is all of scripture just stories or allegories for people to make whatever they wish of them?

Did God really make all of Israel obey a command concerning an event that really never happened as that command testifies, and back that command up with the penalty of death? Is this how God really is?

Psa 31:5  Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O LORD God of truth.

Psa 33:4  For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

Psa 119:142  Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.

Psa 119:151  Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth.

Are the above testimonies lies? Is God not a God of truth? Are his words not true? Is His law not truth? Are His commandments not truth? If not, then how can they be a standard? If so, then why would He lie or exaggerate about his power and the timing of creation?

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

Is David's testimony above wrong? Did it really take long ages of time for God to create, or bring about creation through evolutionary processes, rather than as the above testimony suggests?

Gen 1:3  And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

Sounds pretty much like God spoke, and the thing was done. Not really that complicated, until some try to place their own ideas within it.

2Peter3:8 could apply here

  8But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.

Not to forget there were not paragraphs or punctuations in the original
Hebrew texts.

What if... and no I cannot prove... but what if they put day 1 and so forth to make order of the creation story.

It is not exactly the same in Gen 2.

What if the use of day really meant a period. Or a time. What if the main part of creation happened...

and when it came time for Adam ( man) it happened. at a much later but shorter span of time?

I think what the OP posted has a lot of thinkable ideas .

That does not mean there is anything wrong and when the 7th comes then
you have your Sabbath. I see no problem.

It is just possible common translators who presented it wrong.

Give a thought to where in the bible we learn about the dinosaurs that we have actual bone proof of.

It talks of giants... and there is no proof other then Og's bed.

But no dinosaurs.

Why could they not have been earlier and then died out and then enter man onto an already created setting where God then planted a garden for Adam

He made Adam a garden to be separate from the rest of the created and growing things...

Can you even possibly think about a separate purpose for our lineage because given enough time we all could trace back to him.

[Rella]

To the top.

[Amo]

2Peter3:8 could apply here

  8But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.

Not to forget there were not paragraphs or punctuations in the original
Hebrew texts.

What if... and no I cannot prove... but what if they put day 1 and so forth to make order of the creation story.

It is not exactly the same in Gen 2.

What if the use of day really meant a period. Or a time. What if the main part of creation happened...

and when it came time for Adam ( man) it happened. at a much later but shorter span of time?

I think what the OP posted has a lot of thinkable ideas .

That does not mean there is anything wrong and when the 7th comes then
you have your Sabbath. I see no problem.

It is just possible common translators who presented it wrong.

Give a thought to where in the bible we learn about the dinosaurs that we have actual bone proof of.

It talks of giants... and there is no proof other then Og's bed.

But no dinosaurs.

Why could they not have been earlier and then died out and then enter man onto an already created setting where God then planted a garden for Adam

He made Adam a garden to be separate from the rest of the created and growing things...

Can you even possibly think about a separate purpose for our lineage because given enough time we all could trace back to him.

Yes, one can of course take 2Pe 3:8 out of the context within which it was written regarding the end of this world, which scoffers have come to doubt and apply it to the creation of this world, which scripture nowhere even hints took longer than six days as they simply state it. The question then is, is that rightly dividing the word of God according the Spirit, or wrongly dividing it according to the flesh. It is certainly not because the scriptures themselves lend any credence to such an application. As they support the six day creation throughout.

God had his prophet use days in order, exactly to make an intended order of the creation . To introduce time and the order within which God created and sustains us. Ending the week on the seventh day, and declaring the seventh day as blessed and sanctified. Ending one week and beginning another. Which He backed up and reestablished for His chosen people several times over. Even speaking and writing a commandment with his own mouth and hand to Israel. This is the testimony of holy scripture.

He literally created day and night, "heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is". There was nothing symbolic or prophetic about this creation. It is all still here right in front of us. Day, night, the stars, suns and moon, seas, oceans, and all the life within them. The creation account is not symbolic, prophetic, or allegorical. We still literally see everything established at it. Though greatly altered by the global flood.

You presume that Adam's creation was at a later but shorter span of time, against the testimony of holy scripture. Which plainly states that humanity was created on the sixth day before the seventh day sabbath was established. If one is going to play around with the holy scriptures and make the days mean so many years, they bring into question the word of God. Confusing the simple order He established and intended to set up by creation. Which is in fact the evil one's very purpose in tempting humanity to do so. Beginning the processes of replacing the testimony of scripture with the imaginings of humanity right from the very start of God's testimony. Exactly the method the evil used on Eve to deceive her.

God stated the facts regarding the results of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, in very simple and straight forward terms. The devil cast doubts and questions upon these simply stated conditions, Eve took the bait, and the rest is history. He attacked the foundation of this worlds peace and happiness by raising doubts about God's plain testimony regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Just as he also strives continually to raise doubts regarding the simply stated events of God's creation of this world. That he might strike right at the very root and foundation of holy scripture. Thereby creating the atmosphere of and casting doubt upon all the rest of holy scripture. Attack or destroy the foundation of any structure, and that structure will fall. Unfortunately many professed Christians aid and abet the evil one regarding this most effective methodology.

God is not concerned with whether you or others have a problem or not with the seven day order He established at creation. He has no reason to ever be concerned about anything fallen humanity thinks or imagines. He just loves humanity with a divine love, and seeks to establish the truth of holy scripture within their hearts. That He may be their God, and they might be His people unto everlasting life.

Make no mistake about it, the whole situation has nothing to do with what we have a problem with or not. It is 100% about what God has a problem with or not. If we will not learn this simple truth, we will no longer be, as scripture itself testifies.

The word dinosaur is a modern term. There are mention of very large creatures in scripture similar to what we now call dinosaurs.

Job 40:15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. 17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. 18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. 19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. 20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. 21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. 22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. 23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. 24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.

Are there none of the many plants and animals the bible does not mention that exist right in front of us, simply because the bible does not mention them by present accepted names. Of course not. Neither is such true or suggested regarding dinosaurs, simply because that modern term is not used in scripture.

There are also some bones here and there of giants, which I have presented on these boards. They are simply ignored or refuted by most "scientists", and or destroyed or hidden as often as possible by instigation of the evil one himself. Who desires we have no proof or knowledge of the pre flood world described in holy scripture. There is a reason we find giant remains of many creatures which exist today. Things were simply larger at creation, and have generally decreased in size since then. This is an observable fact, save in regards to humanity, concerning evidences being ignored, hidden, or destroyed.

I suspect though, that God will not allow such to remain before He returns unto judgment. It is not like him to leave any stone unturned that might aid in the salvation of the children He bought with the price of His own blood. Nevertheless, His ways are true and righteous, not mine. It will be as He determines, and rightly so.

Again, it is not about what could have been according to the speculations of fallen humanity. It is about what the word of God has declared, and whether fallen humanity will accept the word of God which is truth, or not. People can speculate, conjecture, and theorize all they want. In the end though, it will be found that God's word is truth, not the endless imaginings of fallen humanity. A great deal of which is contrived and facilitated by the evil one himself, bent upon the destruction of as many as possible.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

[Rella]

To the top again