John and Alex, thank you for your urgent replies to my previous post. John posted within 30 minutes of my post, with his final edit following shortly after, and Alex's reply with final edit was completed within 80 minutes. How much time was given in reading, and more importantly in understanding, my post, which was written over a great period of time, and with much editing, care, thought, and deliberation?
I perceive your mind is made up and have already formed conclusions.
In your use of the word "perceive", John, are you saying that God has revealed my mind to you, and that if I argue with you then I am arguing with God? While that may be a quick way to win an argument, and only from your point of view, perhaps by such a statement you are telling us that it is you who has made up his mind. Have you taken the time to read and to understand my previous posts, or are you quickly shooting off replies with no intention of taking the time? If I am incorrect, and you are correct, how can you be of any help to me if you cannot bother to take the time to understand, and acknowledge that you have understood, my point of view, before shooting off a reply?
However, I will show you from the Scriptures that the Hebrew word for day (yom) means a period of time and not necessarily a 24 hour period of time.
This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. Gen 2:4
The word "day" in this Scripture is the Hebrew word "yom". It refers to the previous six days (also yom) of creation. Thus one day can include six days thereby proving that "yom" does not exclusively mean a time period of 24 hours. Yom can mean an undefined period of time, even millions or billions of years.
Those seven day's [yom] are referred to as a single day [yom] in Genesis 2:4.
…How are you going to tell me now that yom means a literal 24 hour period instead of an undefined amount of time?…
….If seven day's can be one day, same word, that SINGULAR YOM you mentioned, then DAY clearly does not mean a literal 24 hour period but rather an undefined amount of time that begins and ends.
In my posts I have never said that a yom/day is a 24-hour period. Please do not refute what I have not said.
I am quite happy to stick with
Genesis 1:5 and
John 11:9 in regard to the definition of a day. Are you saying that there are two different definitions of a 'day' in Genesis 1:5? Are you despising the words of Jesus (in John 11:9) in bringing forth your day-age hypothesis? If you are not despising the words of Jesus, how are you not doing so? And in regard to
Exodus 20:8-11, is there two definitions/meanings of the word yom/day in that passage of Scripture, as is required by the day-age hypothesis?
In Ray's videos there is a lot of time spent, and time on more than one occasion, validly explaining that 'yom' is not a 24-hour period (Why is that emphasised so often?), and then there seems to be a bait and switch tactic used where instead of concluding that a day is a 12-hour period, which would be in line with what Jesus said in
John 11:9, and in line with
Genesis 1:5, and in line with the could-not-be-24-hours explanations of
Exodus 20:8-11, and
I think in line with the clearly and unambiguously stated one only single evening and one only single morning for each day of Creation, one of which is included in Genesis 1:5, there is a leap in the other direction which concludes that 'yom' can mean eons and ages.
In my previous post I explained in detail, going through a number of Scriptures one by one, Scriptures referred to by Ray, how I could not see how Ray could come to the conclusion that those particular Scriptures were in support of his Genesis day-age hypothesis. You have not refuted any of the explanation and logic I gave as to why those Scriptures do not support the idea that a day can be longer than 12 hours, and that they thus in no way whatsoever support the day-age hypothesis. Of course a number of days can be a longer period of time, but not (I argued) one single day on its own.
Until the time you Scripturally and logically refute the explanations I gave, it can only be taken that you are fully in agreement with that explanation and logic and that you are fully in agreement that those Scriptures do not support the day-age hypothesis, and that those Scriptures do not support the idea that a yom/day singular without any further qualifying expression can be longer than 12 hours. If you disagree, then go through those Scriptures one by one validly refuting my explanation and logic. If you neglect or refuse to do so, then in that matter you lose your case.
You have both attempted to take refuge in Genesis 2:4, stating authoritatively that Genesis 2:4 is referring back to the previous six days of creation/seven days, with Alex using the word: "clearly" and John using the word "proving".
How is it clear?
Is it not possible that this verse is referring back to Genesis 1:1, which says that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth? How many days were involved in Genesis 1:1?
Genesis 2:4 has a similar construction to
Genesis 5:1-2, which (also) refers back to one single day. Both Scriptures mention a descent/generations/history that follows.
By what authority do you say that Genesis 2:4 is referring back to the six days of Creation? Is it by your own authority, did God tell you, did you read it somewhere, did you decide to believe someone who said so to you, does it fit in with what you think science says, or do you have a logical argument to present?
If you are able to argue logically, from the Scriptures, that Genesis 2:4 is referring back to the 6 days of Creation, and not just to Genesis 1:1, then please present that argument. You are otherwise using the "I say so" argument or perhaps it is the "God told me" argument. Please remember that the "I say so" argument does not prove anything (except to you), and if God told you, that fact is unable to be verified by others.
If you are going to say that Genesis 2:4 could not be referring back to Genesis 1:1 because 'day' was not defined until Genesis 1:5, please keep in mind that neither had 'heavens' and 'earth' been defined when those words were used in Genesis 1:1.
Alex, in your definition of 'day' you have not used Scripture (except Genesis 2:4, which use I have disputed), explaining how and where Scripture defines the meaning to 'day' that you say 'day' has. Are there no other Scriptures that you can use? Are you limited to one Scripture only? You have appealed to Strong's. There are enough Scriptures that use the word 'day' to prove your case, if your case does exist. If you can't prove your case from the Scriptures, then I guess you have no option but to appeal to Strong's.
It is also time that you used Scripture in your defence instead of what you think is science.
If Genesis 2:4
is referring back to the six days of Creation, then its context is denoting that the word 'day'
in that verse only is not referring to a literal day. Can that non-literalness of the word 'day' be transferred to another passage of Scripture (although I admit that the other passage of Scripture is close by, and I admit it because my mind is not made up) where non-literalness is not evident in that other passage itself? And if Genesis 2:4
is referring back to the six days of Creation, how can you then expand that six days to billions of years without any other Scriptural authorisation whatsoever? Why not make it six half-seconds, or six trillion trillion years, or a banana flavoured icecream?
From where do you get billions of years?
It is from something from OUTSIDE OF SCRIPTURE that you get your billions of years.
I do not know if observational, experimental and reason based science backs up billions of years or not (how can I personally inspect an ice core).
I have raised certain questions, and I raised them with honesty and integrity, that in my mind bring into serious doubt the idea that Genesis itself backs up the billions of year's scenario.
Oatmeal