Define literal vs non-literal.

the english 'day' is not the literal meaning of the hebrew word 'yom'this is the problem.Yom means many things...it means an age, it means time, it means length of days, it means heat, it means light...forget the english word and get to know what the hebrew word actually means.Yom (Hebrew) A day; by extension an age or time period. Yom and Day are very different.

quote:

---

because we know the facts we should be able to look at these verses and say, 'well they are not literal because...'

---

There's a difference between whether the verse describes something that actually happened and whether the words in the sentence are used literally.This discussion isn't about whether the verses describe something that actually happened as stated. It is about what a word means within a sentence.Genesis 1:5 isn't written figuratively and you haven't shown otherwise.

quote:

---

Yom and day are really worlds apart.

---

No they aren't.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

The facts also tell us- You cannot turn water into wine.
- There was no global flood.
- You cannot walk on water.
- You cannot part a sea with a wooden staff.Are these now to be take non-literally?Please reply.Edited by killinghurts, : Grammar

quote:

---

Gen 1:3 uses a progressive verb which means the light was not instantaneous. And God proceeded to say. is a Hebrew verb wai.yo'mer which is a progressive action. Its not instant and this same verb is used more then 40 times in Genesis. Its not like God flicked a switch and suddenly there was light...the light came to be over a period of time.

---

There was a whole rotation of the planet for the light to gradually come into existence. I don't see that it changes the use of the word yom in Genesis 1:5.

quote:

---

And as i've already mentioned, because it uses a word that has many meanings including figurative meanings, then its not impossible that moses meant for it have a figurative meaning.

---

Yes, it is impossible that Moses meant for it to have a figurative meaning. The writer didn't write the sentence figurative. My guess is you don't understand figurative language either.What imaginative leap did the writer's audience need to make in order to comprehend the author's point?What two unrelated things are being compared?

quote:

---

show in genesis 1:5 how any of these meanings cannot apply.
Show me that Moses viewed the yom of genesis as a 24 hour day...explain why he would write that the 'light' was called 'yom' if he was thinking of time.

---

You can't show me the figurative language in the sentence, but you want me to tell you what Moses knew? Rudely done. I've already showed you what they understood about time, at the time Genesis 1 was written. Message 80Wilson is correct in what he says, but it doesn't apply in Genesis 1:5. Just because a word can be used a certain way, doesn't mean that it is. You have to show me that Geenesis 1:5 was writtenin a way that requires the figurative use of yom. You haven't done that yet.The literal meaning of yom refers to the light period of time of a solar day and it also refers to a solar day (rotation of the planet). I didn't make up the meaning. Message 80 You're focusing on the figurative meanings of yom without a reason.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

quote:

---

The definition gives the literal meaning of the word yom. Either you agree with the definition or you don't.

---

Sorry--I didn't understand your question earlier. Yes, I think the Strongs definition is acceptable. But I prefer the unabridged BDB (Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew Lexicon) which is the standard source for definitions of Biblical Hebrew words.

quote:

---

A metaphor is one technique. Understand the technique. There are various types of metaphors. 18 Types of Metaphors
You suggest extended metaphor:
I don't see this technique in Genesis 1:5.

---

Perhaps "extended metaphor" is too specific, then. How about "extended figure of speech?"

quote:

---

If you still disagree, then show me the words that make it a metaphor. Where are the dissimilar words the author is bringing together. What is being compared?

---

I have already done some of this in Message 93.

quote:

---

Yom and Day are very different.

---

Seriously???? No they aren't.Yom:
1. the period of light (as contrasted with the period of darkness),
2. the period of twenty-four hours,
3. a general vague "time,"
4. a point of time,
5. a year (in the plural; I Sam 27:7; Ex 13:10, etc.)."Day
1. the time of light between one night and the next
2. the mean solar day of 24 hours beginning at mean midnight
3. one of these days at some future time
4. (sometimes plural) a period or point in time he was a good singer in his day in days gone by any day nowJust as with the word yom there are indicators that make the English word day part of an idiom which then gives it the figurative meanings.As you have been shown and as you have just provided the definition, we see the literal meanings of the word yom and the figurative meanings. To use the figurative meanings the indicators have to be there. You can't just deem it so.When "yom" is rendered year it is not the same form as used in Genesis 1:5.miyamim
yamimah.
yamimIn Genesis 1:5 it is rendered "yovm". There is a difference that caused the translator to use the word year instead of day. You can't just render the meaning figurative without the necessary indicators.Show me the indicators.

quote:

---

quote:

---

PD writes:
Why are you telling me this?
It isn't my comment and it has nothing to do with literal or non-literal when it comes to understanding the use of words within a sentence.

---

​

I'm not telling you this, but Peg. Its her quote (my apologies for not including her name though).

---

So why are you now telling ME this? I'm not Peg, any more than PD is.

quote:

---

Perhaps "extended metaphor" is too specific, then. How about "extended figure of speech?"

---

Show me that is even something viable. Link with examples.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If you still disagree, then show me the words that make it a metaphor. Where are the dissimilar words the author is bringing together. What is being compared?

---

I have already done some of this in Message 93.

---

No, message 93 doesn't provide what words within the sentence make it a metaphor.It doesn't matter how the writer categorized the creation. We are talking about a word within a sentence. What words within the sentence makes the sentence a metaphor or figurative or that causes us to use one of the figurative meanings of yom?

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

LOLOk, when you come to accept the definitions that have been given for the hebrew Yom, perhaps then we can keep discussing it.... until then, im out.

Hi Peg can you please reply to my last message, I'm interested in your response.

Literally.
these are to be taken as miraculous events that really happened (except for the flood, that wasnt miraculous, it just rained so much that everything became flooded)but a miraculous event is 'miraculous' by nature...its not somethign that would normally happen without supernatural intervention.

because i dont believe all science is wrong... i believe that some of it is wrong and some of it is based on preconcieved ideas and some of it is right.its the same with archeology. some of it is right, some wrong, some based on preconcieved ideas.Remember these are just humans who are drawing conclusions about the data they collect. They are not infallible and they make mistakes...and they often disagree with each other which shows a lot about just how accurate they can be.

quote:

---

No, message 93 doesn't provide what words within the sentence make it a metaphor.
It doesn't matter how the writer categorized the creation. We are talking about a word within a sentence. What words within the sentence makes the sentence a metaphor or figurative or that causes us to use one of the figurative meanings of yom?

---

YOU might be talking about a particular word within a sentence, but I was not. I was talking about the overall structure of the account as indicating that it is not meant to be literal, chronological history, as I outlined in Message 93.You have characterized the account as a "just-so story." Let's consider a "just-so story" such as Rudyard Kipling's, which he means to be taken as figurative and non-historical. Do you consider the talking animals in the story to be literal, or not? They are certainly not normal animals, because they talk. But neither are these imaginary animals metaphors for something else.This is similar to the way I see the Days in Genesis 1. They aren't quite normal Days (especially the first three). But neither are they, in themselves, metaphors for something else. They are "Days" within a stylized, non-chronological account.

quote:

---

YOU might be talking about a particular word within a sentence, but I was not. I was talking about the overall structure of the account as indicating that it is not meant to be literal, chronological history, as I outlined in Re: Was Evening and Was Morning (Message 93).

---

Apparently you and Peg can't make your case within the sentence, so we move out to the story. Fine, but stop using figurative as a catch all. Just-So-Stories are fiction. As I said in Message 97: Whether the story portrays real events or not is more of an accuracy and inerrancy discussion. To determine whether a word is used literally or figuratively has nothing to do with whether the story actually happened. A true story can have literal and figurative language. A fictional story can have literal and figurative language. A story containing fact and fiction (faction) can have literal and figurative language.

quote:

---

You have characterized the account as a "just-so story." Let's consider a "just-so story" such as Rudyard Kipling's, which he means to be taken as figurative and non-historical. Do you consider the talking animals in the story to be literal, or not? They are certainly not normal animals, because they talk. But neither are these imaginary animals metaphors for something else.

---

Just-So-Stories are fiction and the author means them to be taken as such. You throw literal around like you do figurative.What do you mean by literal? Use the word "exist" if you are talking about whether something exists in real life. Use common meaning, if you are referring to the meaning of the word used.No, we are not to assume the talking animals exist in real life. Yes, we are to visualize a whale per the common usage of the word, but with a bigger throat. How the Whale Got His ThroatThe story is fiction, which means it didn't happen in reality.
The animals are talking. That's personification, a literary technique. I'm sure Kipling used various literary techniques within the story.The story as a whole is not figurative, as you like to put it. The story is not expressing one thing in terms normally denoting another. The listener is to visualize the story just as it is written. They are to visualize the sailor dragging a wooden grate up a whale's throat. In Genesis 1:5 the listener is to visualize a regular length day just without the sun, moon, stars, etc.

quote:

---

This is similar to the way I see the Days in Genesis 1. They aren't quite normal Days (especially the first three). But neither are they, in themselves, metaphors for something else. They are "Days" within a stylized, non-chronological account.

---

They weren't normal, in the sense that certain things weren't created yet, but they were normal length per the common meaning of the word yom as it is used in the sentence.The common meaning of the word "yom" is a name for light as opposed to dark (not the sun, moon, or stars) and it refers to the length of time it takes the earth to rotate once. The word doesn't refer to the sun, moon, or stars. So it is irrelevant whether they are present.The common meaning of yom is used in Genesus 1:5. There is nothing in the story or the sentence to denote any longer time or any figurative usage.

---

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion