ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

First Three Days Of Creation

Is there any reason to believe that the first three days of Creation were of any different length than the last three?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 8/12/09
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



dconklin:

1) The standards mentioned elsewhere in the Bible for how long a day is, and which were in common use when the Bible was written, relied on the Sun, which did not exist during the first three days.
2) The Bible does not make any explicit mention of how long the first three days were
Thus, common sense would dictate that we must admit that "We don't know", rather than making unwarranted assumptions based on facts not in evidence.
---StrongAxe on 8/20/09


Lee you wrote 'Having multiple degrees in one of the sciences (math & physics), I believe I can make such distinction.'

This is described as 'an appeal to authority' and therefore logically if another has superior scientific qualifications then he/she trump you!

I think your definition of the scientific method is quite reasonable. It should therefore show you that the National Geographic story is not based upon the scientific method, but is a belief imposed upon the evidence. Remember evidence does not speak for itself, it is always interpreted in the light of theory.

If something is not verifyable in the laboratory it is not scientific fact, no matter how appealing it may be.
---Warwick on 8/20/09


Lee you persist with nonsense because you are forced to do so, as your view of origins rests not in Scripture, but in the opinions of falible men. Scripture contradicts you. You cannot give any Scripture to support your story.

In Exodus 20:8-11 God says He created in 6-days,rested the 7th, commanding the Israelites do likewise.

You expect people to accept that:

1) God commanded the Israelites to work for 6 days but the first 3 days are of a different length than the 2nd 3, but He doesn't tell them this! Bizarre.

2) God proscribes execution (Ex. 31:12-17) for anyone working on the 7th, but in your story the Israelites could not have known when the fatal 7th day was!

This is nonsense!
---Warwick on 8/20/09


dconklin //True, what would common sense suggest?

Common sense should tell us that if there is nothing in the record that indicates the duration of the 1st 3 Creation days, that our belief that those days were of 24 hour duration is based upon an ASSUMPTION.

So sorry but anyone that can read should be able to see that.
---lee on 8/19/09


//The Christian has the distinct advantage that God is an eye-witness, one who cannot lie, and He says what He did. We by faith, but not blind faith,( See Romans 1:20) accept that He made it just as He says in Genesis and elsewhere.

We can all concur with that however, your problem as I have continually pointed out is that the Genesis record DOES NOT specify any time duration for the 1st 3 days of Creation. In other words, your belief or interpretation is based upon ASSUMPTIONS.
---lee on 8/19/09




>>The scientific method was developed by scientists who were Christian:
>While perhaps true, those same scientists should be able to tell you that the Bible is not a science textbook as few things that are expressed in the Bible such as past events, can be verifiable in a laboratory.

Not "perhaps"--it is true. And you are correct that the Bible is not a science book.

>As to the Creation events, all we have is a skimpy record, and virtually nothing that tells us the duration of time concerning the first 3 days of creation.

True, what would common sense suggest?
---dconklin on 8/19/09


Michael it is true that we cannot test the past in the laboratory. Therefore anyone's view of the past is based upon evidence, and faith applied to that. Everyone has the same evidence.

The Christian has the distinct advantage that God is an eye-witness, one who cannot lie, and He says what He did. We by faith, but not blind faith,( See Romans 1:20) accept that He made it just as He says in Genesis and elsewhere.

Where does that place Christians who will not accept what He says, even if their view undermines the very gospel they claim to promote?
---Warwick on 8/19/09


H3117 Yom, day. Unless it is modified by another word, it means either first light to twilight, or one sunset to the next (24 hours). There are 'old earth' theorists who believe that the first night was some time greater than 12 hours, but the story has to be taken as it was written. Christians believe that God presented an accurate account of the event to Moses.
---Glenn on 8/19/09


Warwick,Let's use the spirit of a sound mind!
Dr.Henry Morris PhD.(Genesis Account) suggests that there were probably 3,000 "kinds" (not species) for Adam to name.
At one creature per minute =50 hrs.
At " " " 30 secs.=25hrs.
You give me your estimate (with some backing)logical and reasonable, and time needed to fit into a 24hr creation day, keeping in mind all the other activity!
Can you "cram" it into 24hrs?
---1st_cliff on 8/19/09


>It is 'absurd' to reject the Jewish Sabbath

There's no such thing as a Jewish Sabbath. Jesus said that Sabbath was made for man (that would be back at Creation) and when the languages were created at the Tower of Babel the concept of the Sabbath as the seventh day of the week was preserved in over 100 languages in their name of the seventh day of the week.
---dconklin on 8/19/09




Since the creation of the earth cannot be tested in a labratory, then any theory pertaining to it is an assumption.
Faith being the belief in things not seen.
To claim that one side is assuming too much is quite hypocritical since either side only interprets the evidence and has no real proof.
I personally believe that since God told Moses that He created the universe in six days, Moses consequently wrote it down for all to read, and given all the current information pertaining to this subject, I conclude that the world was created in six days, as did the early church elders.
Nothing has changed, only man's theories.
---MIchael on 8/19/09


Lee:

You said 'Of course, Christians including some Protestants, disproved Galileo's view that the earth was not the center of our universe.'
If I understand you correctly, does this mean that you believe that the earth IS the center of our universe? I would be very interested to see your sources, and who disproved Galileo!


Warwick:

Since Adam spoke with both God and Eve, he must have possessed language.
---StrongAxe on 8/19/09


//Do you comprehend the difference between theory and the scientific method?

Having multiple degrees in one of the sciences (math & physics), I believe I can make such distinction.

The scientific method is defined as the means of acquiring knowledge scientifically: the system of advancing knowledge by formulating a question, collecting data about it through observation and experiment, and testing a hypothetical answer

Theory can be viewed as a set of hypothetical circumstances or principles, a scientific principle to explain phenomena: a set of facts, propositions, or principles analyzed in their relation to one another and used, especially in science, to explain phenomena, not always verifiable in a laboratory.
---lee on 8/19/09


//The scientific method was developed by scientists who were Christian:

While perhaps true, those same scientists should be able to tell you that the Bible is not a science textbook as few things that are expressed in the Bible such as past events, can be verifiable in a laboratory.

As to the Creation events, all we have is a skimpy record, and virtually nothing that tells us the duration of time concerning the first 3 days of creation.

I know you must have some kind of psychological problem with this as one should be able to plainly see your ASSumptions cannot be adequated supported.
---lee on 8/19/09


Warwick,Careful how you word your posts *just because something has not been found doesn't mean it doesn't exist*
Does the "missing link" could exist?
As I listed the early church fathers and writers did not subscribe to a 24hr creation day!
Problem is all that took place on day "6" could not have been accomplished in that period. God could do it but not Adam, as a limited human!
Create animals and birds,plant a garden,create Adam,instruct him,name the animals and birds ,surgical procedure,bring forth Eve...
---1st_cliff on 8/19/09


Lee, answers would be helpful!

The scientific method was developed by scientists who were Christian: so why would scientists be afraid of the 'big bad wolf of scientific theory'?

Do you comprehend the difference between theory and the scientific method Lee? If so please explain.
---Warwick on 8/19/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


Lee how effectively you illustrate what I have said all along: that your authority is not God but the ever-changing opinions of fallible, sinful, man. This is why you will not accept what Genesis, Exodus, etc says, because you cannot as Scripture undermines your cherished man-made philosophy.

Over the decades popular magazines such as National Geographic have printed articles about man's ancestors, giving us the 'facts', (unsubstantiated) but the 'facts' keep changing, so the story keeps changing, and will do so again when new 'facts' or rather evidence, contradicts the old. Remember when Neandertal man was definitely the missing-link?
---Warwick on 8/19/09


Lee: "the light from God could very well have sustained plant life and other life for eons without the sun being present."

Half true. The light from God could very well have sustained plant life on day 3 of creation, and probably did have similar characteristics to sunlight for that very purpose - BUT ONLY FOR HALF A LITERAL DAY! Remember, there was only 1 evening and 1 morning on day 3. If that morning (period of light) were eons long, as you conjecture, and if the light properties of God were similar to sunlight, as we have concluded they might be, then prolonged exposure to this light (without the night) for eons would destroy all plant life. Don't you agree?

There was no life other than plants on day 3.
---jerry6593 on 8/19/09


1stCliff what you are saying is a certain find is considered evidence that writing existed at a certain date. A lack of evidence does not prove it did not exist previously.

If you have been a fan of science, history and archaeology like me you will be aware new discoveries are being made all the time. Things have been found which have pushed the first appearance of something back again and again. Because things have not been found does not mean they did not exist.

Consider the Coelacanth which evolutionists claimed had been extinct since the end of the cretacious period, c70 million years ago. Along with countless other claims they were wrong as the Coelacanth is alive and well, and unchanged, as a little research will show.
---Warwick on 8/18/09


Warwick, The oldest known written "alphabet" (necessary for conveying speech) was in Egypt about 2000 BCE.
Moses,being raised as Pharaoh's son would be familiar with this and subsequently named as author of the pentateuch.
2,000 years is a long time to hand down "oral info" accurately,and perhaps translated from another tongue or dialect!
Can we really be dogmatic about ancient grammar?
---1st_cliff on 8/18/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


In this months National Geographic, there is an article "From Africa to Astoria by way of everywhere". Basically the article highlights the view that man has been on earth for around 70,000 years and traces his migration to other parts of the world.

The article is worth the reading and brings into question that there are reputable scientists out there that believe the world and its associated universe were created in a mere six 24 days.

Of course, Christians including some Protestants, disproved Galileo's view that the earth was not the center of our universe.

But such is the struggle of truth against beliefs that are based upon erroneous views of scripture.
---Lee on 8/18/09


Lee regarding an earlier blog of yours there are highly qualified scientists who blog here (and elsewhere) who are convinced God created in 6 everyday ordinary earth-rotation days, as God says in Genesis and Exodus.

One scientist friend works in the field of designing satellites and placing them in orbit. He says your view is wrong, not based in scientific fact, nor in Scripture.

The scientific method was developed by scientists who were Christian so why would scientists be afraid of the 'big bad wolf of scientific theory'?

Do you comprehend the difference between theory and the scientific method Lee? If so please explain.

Because they are qualified scientists does that mean their belief is superior to yours?
---Warwick on 8/18/09


Warwick - *The idea God was incapable of supporting His creation without the sun, is in fact an argument for a short period of time between the beginning of creation and when the sun was created! Three days maybe?

Good enough, at least now you are agreeing with me that nothing exists or dies without God's will. And thus, the light from God could very well have sustained plant life and other life for eons without the sun being present.

//If the 6-days were not of equal length then the Sabbath day would be unknowable, leading to people's execution for disobedience! Absurd.

It is 'absurd' to reject the Jewish Sabbath (not required of the church) even if the periods of time during creation were not ordinary days.
---Lee on 8/18/09


1stCliff right through the OT and the NT whenever quotes or allusions to Genesis occur they always treat it as sober historical fact. In fact Jesus and the apostles alone quoted from or alluded to Genesis chapters 1-11 107 times, always as sober historical truth!

As the creator considered it to be historical prose what Christian would believe otherwise?

Who says there was no written language pre-flood?

Was Adam created with the ability to speak language or was he a grunting brute? Could God have created him also with writing skills as well? If not why not?

BTW was it a local or world-wide flood?
---Warwick on 8/17/09


Send a Free Christmas Ecard


Warwick, I don't know how you can be "dogmatic" about, Day, evening,morning,field etc when you can't tell for sure that in Gen 1 & 2 God was speaking (or soliloquising) Hebrew (as we know the grammar today) there were only "oral" vowels etc..and to whom . who recorded this conversation when no written language was extant pre-flood!
Did Hebrew survive Babel?
You know how much Fnglish has changed in our lifetime,add 6,000 years and be dogmatic!
---1st_cliff on 8/17/09


>While that may be true of sunlight, did the light from God have the same characteristics & properties as light from the sun?

Itis true that we do not know. It would be a wild conjecture to assume otherwise. God expects us to use a modium of common sense.
---dconklin on 8/17/09


>If the 6-days were not of equal length then the Sabbath day would be unknowable, leading to people's execution for disobedience! Absurd.

Excellant point.
---dconklin on 8/17/09


God created light ('or'), then later created the sun (ma-or) light giver. God alone creates from nothing (Hebrew bara), well able support His creation without the sun.

To assume He could not is impudence.

The idea God was incapable of supporting His creation without the sun, is in fact an argument for a short period of time between the beginning of creation and when the sun was created! Three days maybe?

I also give to God alone that He is perfect, makes no mistakes, cannot lie, therefore did what He says, and says what He did. To insist He is vague is impudence.

As Scripture says it is by faith we believe the world was created, as per Genesis, and that which is not of faith is of sin.
---Warwick on 8/17/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


\\
Cluny, I agree Scripture calls, the bread and the wine, Jesus body and blood. Now I have looked and it isn't. I (along with multitudes of others) can only assume this is a spiritual message as it is highly unlikely God was recommending canibalism.\\

Believe what you want to believe.

I'll believe our Lord, God, and Saviour Jesus Christ and His holy Word.
---Cluny on 8/17/09


Lee-
Howbeit, anyone that can reason should be able to see that the first 3 days of creation were WITHOUT the SUN, hence they were ANYTHING BUT ORDINARY DAYS.

Point taken Lee, very interesting. Just because scripture often refers to six days and the Sabbath it does not require days of the creation to be stuck within the parameters of 24 hours. You are correct.
Its no big deal for God.
---larry on 8/17/09


In the Romanist view of the Eucharist, the claim of a miracle taking place when there is no evidence is based upon nothing less than superstition.

As to the creation events, the record does not specify any time duration. And that is the problem with those whose beliefs are based on assumptions or things not in the text. Of course, they are afraid of the big bad wolf of scientific theory.
---Lee on 8/17/09


Cluny, I agree Scripture calls, the bread and the wine, Jesus body and blood. Now I have looked and it isn't. I (along with multitudes of others) can only assume this is a spiritual message as it is highly unlikely God was recommending canibalism.

As I understand it this was not some stylized sacrament, a churchy thing, originally, but Jesus telling them to remember me everyday when you eat bread and drink wine. He was implanting in them a way of keeping Himself in their minds via two commonly consumed substances.

Sadly the church I attend has replaced wine with sickly grape juice. Yuk give me Shiraz any day, or even Petit Verdot!
---Warwick on 8/17/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


//If there was a single evening and a single morning (as the Hebrew says) then the plants would have died off and the insects and animals that depend in the plants would have starved to death.

While that may be true of sunlight, did the light from God have the same characteristics & properties as light from the sun?

Again, we simply do not know.
---Lee on 8/17/09


Alan, I know you have sun, I became sunburned there!

We say 24hr day as it is almost 24.

If the earth's rotation rate has been slowing since day 1 a day will now be longer. We cannot prove the differnce as we cannot assume the slowing has been constant.

Nonetheless God defined the first ever day in Genesis 1:5, giving the same description for the following 6 and confirms they are of equal length in Exodus 20:8-11. When we write 6-days we mean 6 24hr days. Therefore why would God say He created over 6 days, rested the 7th, commanding the Israelites to do likewise, if He didn't?

If the 6-days were not of equal length then the Sabbath day would be unknowable, leading to people's execution for disobedience! Absurd.
---Warwick on 8/17/09


>The light from God created on the 1st day could have lasted eons with the earth having hundreds of rotations.

If there was a single evening and a single morning (as the Hebrew says) then the plants would have died off and the insects and animals that depend in the plants would have starved to death.

Another view of the 4th day is as a description of setting the rotation of the earth on its axis and around the sun so as to set up the seasons.
---dconklin on 8/17/09


//Indeed 'evening' and 'morning' were used to define 'day one', the first ever day.

And there is virtually nothing in the record that tells us how much time there was between the 1st 'evening' & the 1st 'morning'.

The light from God created on the 1st day could have lasted eons with the earth having hundreds of rotations.

Glad to see that your position on the 24 hour thing is disintegrating, but that is what happens when you base too many things on ASSumptions. It truly amazes me that you trouble your mind over such things. Have you ever had a debate on how many angels can sit on the head of a pin?
---Lee on 8/17/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


Actually, the rotation of the earth and its revolution around the sun have been slowing ever so nearly imperceptibly. Remember leap seconds added at the end of each year?

This suggests to me that it's entirely possible the length of days of creation were NOT what they are now, even if you believe in only a 6,000 year age for the earth.
---Cluny on 8/17/09


Yes,

Time is not a constant, and I don't mean between our time and God's. Read about Einstein's theory on time. look up "Einstein was right: space and time bend"

If the earth was expanding, then time in the beginning was different than time now.
---Stephen on 8/17/09


Lee, having not sought your advice, God is under the misapprehension He can light the earth without the sun.

Indeed 'evening' and 'morning' were used to define 'day one', the first ever day. Therefore when 'evening' and 'morning' are used with 'day' to mean a day of approximately 24hrs, (whether it be Monday Thursday or Sunday), it shows Genesis 1:5 defines it so!

I am sure even the slowest among us, the 'great unwashed' has grasped that your dogged defense of the indefensable occurs because you have an extraBiblical ulterior motive.

You insist we cannot use any Scripture outside of Genesis 1 to prove the length of the first 3 days. Again you are in error, as Exodus 20:8-11 ably demonstrates.
---Warwick on 8/17/09


Warwick

We do egt some sun here. So much earlier this year that I bought a cotton gazebo so when my daughter visits with my grandaughter they could sit out in the garden with other babies, and be shielded from the sun.

Next day, the rain cam back, so I have not yet erected it!

If days are lengthening, why is is now only 23.59.4 ... that seems to be a shortening!
---alan8566_of_uk on 8/17/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


This is only my opinion since I began reading this blog. I believe this question had a different agenda then what it states. Though it is asking for the first three days of Creation, the main thing it wants to bring out is really the seventh day Sabbath. On the one hand those who believe one way fight for that way and those who believe the other way fight against it. I don't believe that if someone believes one way he is not saved. What saves people is the grace of God through faith. Faith on the works of Christ on the Cross and His resurrection. Calling each other names or insults does not change anything.
---MarkV. on 8/17/09


Alan, when the earth's rate of rotation slows it takes longer for the earth to complete one rotation therefore a day is a little longer than it was in the past.

Maybe you don't get to see enough sun in the UK to notice!!! Here we are in beautiful Sydney, in winter and yesterday peaked at 26 Celsius, or about 78 Fahrenheit.

I'm off to the beach!
---Warwick on 8/16/09


//Relevantly 'evening and morning' are used together without 'day' 38 times outside of Genesis 1, always indicating an ordinary day.

Howbeit, anyone that can reason should be able to see that the first 3 days of creation were WITHOUT the SUN, hence they were ANYTHING BUT ORDINARY DAYS.

You really cannot use any scripture 'outside' of Genesis 1 to prove what duration constituted the first 3 periods of Creation.
---Lee on 8/16/09


Warwick ... is my maths awry?

"We are told the earth's rotation rate is slowing so therefore the exact length of one day, today, is longer than the first ever day, defined by Genesis 1:5.

Today, one day, is not 24hours, but 23hours 59 minutes and 4 seconds. But we call it 24 hours don't we?"

If the rotation is slowing, then one day would now be longer than in the past, surely?
---alan8566_of_uk on 8/16/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Lee, you are playing pedantic semantic games.

God says He created in 6-days, and commanded the Israelites to work for 6 of these days. Throughout The OT and NT people took part in events which covered 1,2,3,4,5,6 days, and longer. In 1967 there was the 6-day war.

We are told the earth's rotation rate is slowing so therefore the exact length of one day, today, is longer than the first ever day, defined by Genesis 1:5.

Today, one day, is not 24hours, but 23hours 59 minutes and 4 seconds. But we call it 24 hours don't we?

Nonetheless God created in 6-days, each as He says, composed of a period of light and darkness, just exactly how we define one day today because Genesis 1:5 tells us so!
---Warwick on 8/16/09


Warwick - No matter how Holman or any other dictionary defines the duration of a 'day', it does not change the FACT that the Genesis record DOES NOT specify the duration of the first 3 creation days.

In other words (hopefully I can get down to your level of understanding), Genesis does not say anything about a '24' hour day. All that is basically and clearly an ASSUMPTION on your part.
---Lee on 8/16/09


Meira - *Lee, The issue is your abusive name calling for any one that doesn't agree with you.

Yes, I can see that I often put the children of Hagar on the ropes. But is that my fault?

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
---Lee on 8/16/09


1stCliff, Lee gave a quote from the Holman Bible Dictionary showing that Genesis 1:5 defines a 24hr day-the first ever day. The Hebrew-Aramaic OT Lexicon indicates 'day' in Genesis 1:5 as a 'day of twenty-four hours.'

Relevantly 'evening and morning' are used together without 'day' 38 times outside of Genesis 1, always indicating an ordinary day. And 'evening' or 'morning' are likewise used 23 times with 'day' always meaning an ordinary day. And 'night' is used with 'day' 52 times always indicating an ordinary day.

This is why God can say He created in 6-days (all obviously the same length), commanding the Israelites to work 6-days, rest the 7th. Otherwise this commandment is meaningless.
---Warwick on 8/16/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Lee: "I am neither a darwinist or an evolutionist."

You once avowed such beliefs on this website. Glad to see that we have dissuaded you from that false religion. Now you no longer have any reason to distort the clear meaning of scripture to support this silly "1st 3 days were eons long" fable.
---jerry6593 on 8/16/09


Warwick, If you're truly "standing by God's word" in Genesis The actual words in Hebrew do not contain "and there was" (added in English to make it flow) It says "evening and morning 'n'day" No way to tell from the context "24 hr day"!
Philo,Josephus,Justin Martyr,Iraneus,Hippolytus,Clement,Origen,Lactanius,Victorinus,Methodius,Augustine,Eusibus,Basil and Ambrose all believed in a longer than 24hr creation day!(Wheaton College)
---1st_cliff on 8/15/09


Lee, The issue is your abusive name calling for any one that doesn't agree with you.

But with regards to your comment, "And that is why people like yourself, find fault with me as I would dare question some of these cherished 'sacrosant' beliefs."

Do you also question the 'sacrosant" belief that "Jesus" died on the cross and rose from the dead? Sound like you are about to question yourself out of your own faith, whatever that is.

You should not find fault with those who think that the Scriptures as inspired by Elohim is correct in their meaning.
---Meira on 8/15/09


Meira - //If you are a really a Christian then your actions would reflect a changed and set apart character.

Being a Christian does not mean that one should assassinate his intellect. All too often people who claim to be Christians are guilty of accepting whatever beliefs are handed to them on some kind of ecclesiastical platter.

Of course, these people have their own agenda, preaching that you should follow them without question but they really seek their own glory.

And that is why people like yourself, find fault with me as I would dare question some of these cherished 'sacrosant' beliefs.
---Lee on 8/15/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


//needed to prop up your belief in darwinism...

I realize you love to label and slander people but for the record, I am neither a darwinist or an evolutionist.

I totally believe in the entire Bible, but unlike you, recognize that some base their beliefs totally on ASSUMPTIONS - One being that the Genesis record tells us that the first 3 periods of creation were of 24 hours duration.

Anyone that can read should be able to see that the record DOES NOT specify any duration whatsoever.

It baffles me that some who would dispute something that most would view as obvious. But that is the problem with those reading into the record things that are really not there.
---Lee on 8/15/09


Thanks for that Jerry, I missed it. So for Lee 'eons' equates to 28.74 hours! Therefore the whole 6 days of creation are 28.74 hours long according to Lee. Works for me.

I wonder why he never explained this before?
---Warwick on 8/15/09


---Adetunji

Huh? What was that all about.
---jerry6593 on 8/15/09


Lee: "Frankly the 3rd day of creation was only 28.74 hours in duration."

Great! At least you're getting closer. I guess that rules out your previous "eons long" ASSUMPTION needed to prop up your belief in darwinism.

Now you don't have to explain:

(1) The impossibility of plants living for eons in darkness,

(2) The massive angular acceleration of the earth at the day 3-4 transition, or

(3) The lack of a thick coal seam beneath the Cambrian layer.
---jerry6593 on 8/15/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


Lee you have been supplied with sound Biblical evidence for the length of the 6 creation days. You have also been supplied with evidence from dictionaries showing that Genesis 1:5 defines a 24hr day. Also evidence of the same from Oxford Hebrew Scholar James Barr. Also from Dr Andrew Steinmann, Associate Professor of Theology, from Dr Robert McCabe, Professor of Old Testament. Also from the Standard Hebrew lexicon.

All of these men, dictionaries and lexicon say Genesis 1:5 defines a day of 24hrs!

But you know better than God, and all the experts!

I challenge you again to provide any Scriptural evidence that the 6 days of creation are not 24hrs or thereabouts.
---Warwick on 8/15/09


1stCliff it is true that in comparison to you I am just a fool! I stand bathed in your radiance.

However in my defence, miserable though i am, I can only say I trust God is Holy and Magnificent and always tells the Truth. None of which applies to me or to you.

Genesis 1:5 is the only definition God gives for a 24hr day and the experts agree with him. See my last reply to the likewise self-exhalted Lee.

A question: If I asked you to work for me for 6-days would you ask me 'how long are your days?' If not why not?

---Warwick on 8/15/09


Lee-
Once again you have demostrated your true nature by the amount of name callling and aggressive language that you use.

Why would person want to know your christ when you act no different and with the hostility of the unsaved world around you.

If you are a reaaly a christian then your actions would reflect a changed and set apart character.
---Meira on 8/14/09


Warwick,I see you still have trouble with the English language.
As I have pointed out but you still ignore God's actual words- Gen.1.5.
The light He called "day" (not morning)
The darkness He called "night" (not evening)
The evening and morning were the beginning and end of a "creation day" not 24hrs.
The Israelites demonstrated,on a weekly scale God's 6 creation days and rest!
One "rests" when one is tired,God was not tired!,again a "demonstration" of resting a 7th day!
---1st_cliff on 8/14/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


Jerry, pray against the spirit of unbelief of the Almighty God that is troubling you. You want to have a day calculator that can tell you the exact length of a day about 6000years ago when you cannot prove whether you actually descended from your great grand-father. Please note that this is not an accusation or rebuke against you, but to tell you that the complexity/capacity of human-brain/level is not enough to totally grasp the PHENOMENOM that the Almighty God is. If God says anything, please BELIEVE.
---Adetunji on 8/14/09


Warwick //Genesis 1:5 defines the length of the first ever 24hr day.

Genesis 1:5 does NOT define the length of any of the first days of Creation.

Apparently your problem is you do not in the least understand what constitutes a definition.

According to the dictionary, a definition is "a brief 'PRECISE' statement of what a word or expression means"

Since the Genesis record DOES NOT specify the duration of the creation days, all you are left with is known as an ASSUMPTION.

ASSUMPTION: "something taken for granted: something that is believed to be true without proof, belief without proof: the belief that something is true without having any proof"
---Lee on 8/14/09


//The only reason that anyone would conceive of such a theory is to allow for a non-supernatural (god of random chance) origin and/or development of life on earth. Are there any others?

Again totally ludicrous! Anyone can be totally orthodox in doctrinal beliefs and be able to see that the Genesis record does NOT specify the duration of the 1st 3 days of creation.

What you want to believe is really another matter.

Frankly the 3rd day of creation was only 28.74 hours in duration. Where do I see that? In the same place you find 24 hour duration.

I think you should give up on this one, or perhaps find yourself a special ed teacher - one that deals with mentally challenged children.
---Lee on 8/14/09


I have still not seen a valid reason to believe that the first 3 days of creation were anything but 3 normal, ~24-hour days. The only reason that anyone would conceive of such a theory is to allow for a non-supernatural (god of random chance) origin and/or development of life on earth. Are there any others?
---jerry6593 on 8/14/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


Lee Genesis 1:5 defines the length of the first ever 24hr day. Opposite to your claim we only know the length of the last 3 creation days because we know the length of the first, day one! For the same reason we still know what is meant by 6-days. Or do you say my 6-day week is of a diferent length than your 6-day week? Therefore it is irrelevant whether the necessary light came from the sun or not.

Ironically your Holman Bible Dictionary quote confirms Genesis 1:5 defines a 24hr day! Now you reject your own evidence!

You prefer mans unproveable fables to the word of the perfect infalible God who was there, creating without any human input or 'intellect' needed!

Nonetheless you claim you follow Him!
---Warwick on 8/13/09


//There is really no way around that at all as the record clearly does not tell us anything about the duration of any of those 'days'.//

Just as they're language nuassiance in Am. English, their are in Hebrew as well. When a hebrew writer wrote day with (night & day), it referred to a 24 hour period.

The hebrew word for day is "yowm". Everywhere in scripture "yown" refers to a 24 hour period. Why would this same word only have different meaning in Genesis 1:1-11.

If you can not believe El's account of creation, then why believe the rest of scripture. It is all inspired by the same Author.

If you do not believe so then who is the Author and finisher of your faith? heb5:9, 12:2
---Meira on 8/13/09


Lee ... may I suggest you read carefully what Cluny actually wrote?

And what he meant by it?
---alan8566_of_uk on 8/13/09


Cluny - \\Anytime the word "day" is preceeded or followed by "day" and "night" -as it is in Gen 1, we can be more than confident that is refers to a literal 24 hr day.\\

And with the creation of the Sun, the meaning of 'day' was clearly modified. True????

While you may be confident that all the periods of creation were of 24 hours duration, anyone should be able to see that what you have believed is called an ASSUMPTION!!!!!

There is really no way around that at all as the record clearly does not tell us anything about the duration of any of those 'days'.
---Lee on 8/13/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


\\Actually, we do. Anytime the word "day" is preceeded or followed by "day" and "night" -as it is in Gen 1, we can be more than confident that is refers to a literal 24 hr day.\\

And just why, other than assuming so, can "we be more than confident" of this?

This sounds like circular reasoning based on an a priori assumption to me.
---Cluny on 8/13/09


The problem addressed here is that the Genesis account does NOT reveal the duration of the 1st 3 days of creation.

A day as we now know it is viewed in relation to the sun, but the sun was NOT created until the 4th 'day'.

Genesis 1:16 tells us that God also created the stars, but astronomers will tell us that the light we view from many of these stars are can be millions of years old. Stars are viewed as being light years away from the earth.

So there is really no reason to surmise that God is bound by our concept of time, or that the first 3 days were only of 24 hour duration.
---Lee on 8/12/09


Meira - *If you can not trust the biblical account of creation, then how can you trust that you are "saved". ...

While one can fully believe in the Biblical account of creation, there is virtually nothing in Genesis that indicates the 1st 3 days were of 24 hour duration. It truly amuses me that some believe we must submit to their interpretation of the Bible in order to know we are 'saved,.

//Science text books change pretty often, the Bible hasn't.

The Bible has changed considering all the different versions and scholarly studies made over the centuries.
---Lee on 8/12/09


No, I believe all days were equally created,except that He rested on the 7th day
---Martha on 8/12/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


//interesting question... we really have no exact way to relate to Gods concept of time.
Who know maybe we are still living in the seventh day?
---kevin on 8/12/09//

Actually, we do. Anytime the word "day" is preceeded or followed by "day" and "night" -as it is in Gen 1, we can be more than confident that is refers to a literal 24 hr day.

If you can not trust the biblical account of creation, then how can you trust that you are "saved". the details of Yahushua in the NT and the details of creation are all inspired by the same Elohim.

Science text books change pretty often, the Bible hasn't. When you study the Bible and real science you see that they actually agree.
---Meira on 8/12/09


Thanks Kevin and Anon - I am clueless.

Have you heard the latest from physicist Dr. Gerald Schroeder, who argues the first twenty-four hour day was a time period of 8 billion years. As the universe continued to expand, the second day was only 4 billion years, the third day was 2 billion years, the fourth day was 1 billion years, the fifth day was 1/2 billion years and the sixth day was 1/4 billion years for a grand total of 15 3/4 billion years-the claim of secular scientists.
He offers no biblical support for his theory but does appear on Christian television discussing the days of creation.
Interesting.
---larry on 8/12/09


interesting question... we really have no exact way to relate to Gods concept of time.
Who know maybe we are still living in the seventh day?
---kevin on 8/12/09


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.