RE: God and Science quotation: Maybe, maybe not.
My Hebrew teacher of years ago - a native Israeli Jew of Tel Aviv who had degrees in both Hebrew and English - would disagree, especially on the usage of Yom.
I have backgrounds in both science and theology; I am not therefore especially impressed by either one, after all the personal egotism and political corruption that I have witnessed to permeate both.
As with so-called global warming, the fix is in: Scientists cook the data, exaggerating favorable information and ignoring contradictory information. Science today is mostly Scientism: A belief system designed to deny a Creator and Law, and to promote global collectivism.
If you want to believe what you posted, then go ahead; I believe in that freedom. Just do not expect me to be particularly persuaded. Neither you nor any of these other “scientists” were present to witness the Creation, or to witness so-called Evolution. It is all, in the end, sophistry and propaganda; it certainly is not true replicable science.
I believe in a God who actually can transcend nature and science. Denigrate me as stupid or simple if you like (although my 150+ IQ would not cooperate).
My opinion of people like yourself and the website you linked is that you are so desperate to appease the fallen prophets of Scientism that you will complicate and rationalize anything in the Bible to accommodate people who will regardless think anyone remotely religious is ignorant and irrational.
It reminds me of a highly-educated theologian I once knew who sought to truncate a debate by interjecting, “There’s no scientific evidence for that.” My immediate thought was: Do you really want to invoke “science” as an authority when “science” says you are an idiot for believing in the Risen Christ?
Science has led us astray - and departed from Natural Law - too many ways and too many times for me to have much confidence in it. The scientific method is a tool, and that is all; it is not God. A tool - like a gun - can be used well or ill. Since most of the users these days are dedicated leftists who hate the thought of inalienable rights and natural law, I do not trust them.
The Bible makes it clear that the five "days" were in fact literal days. The Hebrew word for day (Yom) appears over 400 times in the Old Testament, always in reference to a literal 24-hour day. Unless one wishes to compromise with evolution (and therefore undermine the Gospel), there is no reason not to believe that the days of creation were literal as well. The repetition of the phrase "evening and morning" and the Fourth Commandment (Exodus 20:11) further destroy any possibility for long ages being used for creation.
"The vast ages of the earth does not diminish the power and glory of God, but establishes that God thought that preparing the earth for human habitation was worth the billions of years of preparation."
At the end of each day, God declared that His creation was "very good" i.e perfect, no death, decay, etc. If it was truly created over vast ages, what was occurring during the billions of years of preparation? Evolution (DEATH of the weak, DECAY of their dead bodies, survival of the fittest.) the Biblical text plainly says death, the "Last Enemy," did not enter until Adam sinned. To say that God's "very good" creation required long ages of death before Adam's sin distorts His inspired Word, slanders the person and work of Jesus Christ, and makes God a liar.
Remember, it all started with the words "did God really say?"
The universe and all that is within it was created mature already in action and fully functional. Naturally to the scientific eye it appears old, but that’s because the chicken was put here already laying the egg.
So much for the what came first the chicken or the egg.