A Genesis Day and the Age of the Earth: what does the Bible say?

In Gen the word'Day' refers to the daylight hours in contrast with the nighttime.
But later it goes on to use the word 'day' to refer to other units of time of varying length. In both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures, the word 'day' (Heb., yohm; Gr., heme′ra) is used in a literal and in a figurative or even symbolic sense.The Hebrews began their 'day' in the evening, after sunset, and ended it the next day at sunset. This shows that its not always based on daylight.Sometimes the word 'day' is used to indicate a measure of distance, as in the expressions 'a day’s journey' Nu 11:31The term 'day(s)' is also used with reference to a time period contemporaneous with a particular person, as for example, 'the days of Noah' and 'the days of Lot.' Lu 17:26-30 & Isa 1:1.But that strongest evidence for me that 'day' in genesis is not literally 24 hours long is that the account says that each day came to its completion with the words ... 'And there came to be evening and there came to be morning' a first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth day. but the seventh day is not said to have come to its completion. Is that day still in progress??? Is God still resting from his creative works?Perhaps so because at Hebrews 4:1-10 the apostle Paul indicated that God’s rest day was still continuing in his generation, and that was more than 4,000 years after that seventh-day rest period began.

Hi Peg, Since they thought God started His work in the evening, why wouldn't they start their day at evening?Really that is what their book said. Genesis 1:5 the evening and the morning was the first day. Actually it did not measure the distance. It limited the distance a man could travel from morning until evening depending upon the mode of transportation. Day = 24 hoursDays = multiple 24 hour periods.Days of Noah = the number of 24 hour periods in the life span of Noah.Days of Lot = the number of 24 hour periods in the life span of Lot.In each of your examples day = 24 hours. In what perversion of the Bible do you find, "and there came to be morning" or "And there came to be evening". God transliterated kalah meaning, completed, finished.God transliterated shabath meaning, ceased, rested from labor.God ceased His creative work.6k+ years ago.God will resume His creative work, When the heavens and the earth melts with fervent heat (2Peter 3:10) and God creates a New Heaven and a New Earth (Revelation 21:1).So yes God's day of not creating is still continuing as described by Peter, To God time does not exist.But the 7th day of Genesis 2:3 ended with the morning of the first day of the week.SORRY THE HEBREW TEXT WILL NOT APPEAR CORRECTLY.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi anglagard, I don't know if it is good to have a librarian or English teacher to keep me straight or not.Thanks, I should have said:Everything in the universe was created in the beginning as recorded in Genesis 1:1. Well my God gave man the knowledge and ability to learn to cure those things. Enough is Enough.In the town where I live we have two food banks, 1 homeless shelter, 1 shelter for battered women and 1 for young girls who get pregnant.Everyone of them is owned and run by those Christians you claim to be better than.I have yet to find the one sponsored by any other religion, or the one sponsored by the atheist.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Peg,
I think you missed my article, where I mention all those other meanings. Here it is again:

quote:

---

One might ask how the darkness before the first day is included in the six days of creation then? Well, that is from Exodus 20:11 which uses a different defintion of "day". In that case, the darkness before the day is made part of a 24 hour day defintion. I have an article explain this: The Genesis Definition of Day

---

The Hebrews began days at both sunrise and sunset. ONLY the Jews after the destruction of the temple always began days at sunset.

quote:

---

But that strongest evidence for me that 'day' in genesis is not literally 24 hours long is that the account says that each day came to its completion with the words ... 'And there came to be evening and there came to be morning' a first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth day. but the seventh day is not said to have come to its completion. Is that day still in progress??? Is God still resting from his creative works?

---

Right, my article agrees with most of that. It is only 12 hours.I also came to your defense on the Terah-Abraham connection thread with some additional info you could have used to show that Terah 205 = Abraham 75 is correct.

---

Creation 4140 B.C. Flood 2484 B.C
Exodus 1632 B.C. Online Chronology book: The Scroll of Biblical Chronology

When do you think the stars were made? The stars were made, like everything else was made, when God decided to create beings in his own image, that could love. He then knew that not one of them would keep from sinning, and all would have eternal bad conscience, accusing them forever. He then knew that the only way to overcome that was for him to accept the blame himself, and this was to be achieved on a cross in a place called Palestine. That was God's work. After that, he 'rested' (and not for a day!). His creation was made possible because he had made that decision to self sacrifice, and the cross event is expressed as the six days of creation, pictured as six days of the seven-day week that the Israelites kept, though they were to keep the last day as a rest day as a prefigurement of the rest from trying to justify oneself by works that the Christian enjoys.

This article was posted in another thread where it was deleted. Deleting it from here too.Edited by AdminModulous, : No reason given.

As I mentioned in this postThis is just cut and paste from another siteEdited by Theodoric, : spelling

No it isn't. I initially copied the information from the book, changed a number of things, added things and reworded things. It is not a cut and paste. You can google books it and read the original article and see the difference yourself.Is this an attempt to avoid it?

In any other world this would be plagiarism. Changing a few things does not mean it isn't cut and paste.You have no original thoughts?Here is where you got everything in your post.
Here
and HerePretty damn close to word for word.Amazing what you can find out with those intertubes and the google.Edited by Theodoric, : attempt at humour

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

WRONG!This is where my source was, exactly where I said it was and where I said you could check. Hard Sayings of the Bible - Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Peter H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, Manfred Brauch - Google BooksI have never seen those two articles, wise guy. I admitted that I gleaned the info from the book. That is why I left certain references in the article so that people could look up those things in the book.Of course, I would never attempt to sell that article or turn it in for a college paper or it would be too close and would be considered plagiarism. Edited by adimus, : No reason given.Edited by adimus, : No reason given.Edited by adimus, : No reason given.Edited by adimus, : No reason given.Edited by adimus, : No reason given.

You evidently have a different definition for glean than the standard definition. I don't see anything there about copying word for word.Just admit you copied word for word(with some selective changes, so you could pretend it was yours) and posted it here. What you did was at the minimum dishonest.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

I already admitted in the original post exactly where it came from. I also admitted that I changed a number of things for various reasons. Obviously there were many statements that were word for word. I even gave the link to the article I took it from.

Show me any post where I claimed to be "better" than any Christian that runs a food bank, homeless shelter, battered woman's shelter, or pregnant teen shelter. Then start a new thread with your assertion that no religion other than Christianity offers aid to the hungry, the homeless, battered women, or pregnant teens.Support or retract your accusations, or show all including God that you spit on any commandment against bearing false witness.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

Hi anglagard, I do owe you an apology as I spoke hastly in a heated moment.If I remember correctly you have never specifically,"claimed to be "better" than any Christian that runs a food bank, homeless shelter, battered woman's shelter, or pregnant teen shelter."But when I read statements like you made following the hundreds I have already read after awhile it gets to be too much.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Spoken as a true gentleman, I accept without condition.{ABE} I have also misrepresented any 'opposition' in the heat of the moment and therefore am equally guilty on some occasions{/ABE} It is not my purpose to upset anyone, but rather to ask that they question even that which is most difficult to question. The true God can handle it.Perhaps I should remind you that I do believe in God, I believe that the gospels are the greatest story ever told, and that the Bible is an extremely important collection of books in understanding the development of Christianity and the human condition.The difference lies in the fact I also consider the Tao and Bhagavad Gita equally inspired, even though the message may significantly differ, particularly when it comes to humility in the face of God.And of course the main difference, that I believe in the works of God over the words of men.This whole deal to me is that I have the inherent right to defend my interpretation of religion against all others when it comes to public education or government sanctions.You are more than welcome by me to interpret what you consider holy and to express such beliefs in any forum. Just don't expect your interpretations to be immune from critical analysis.I hope that in the future, you would also allow me the same consideration. Naturally subject to an equivalent critical analysis.Now I think it best to end this side discussion and deal with the subject at hand. I have basically said my peace, should you wish to continue, start a new thread.Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza