Replies

But, to me, to interpret "day," or even the components of a "day" ("evening" and "morning"), would imply that God has a domain analgous to that on Earth, which strikes me as being just a little arrogant on the part of us relatively insignificant creatures.

Boy, I'm not trying to be difficult here, but that's the first time I've ever heard anyone say that interpreting the words day and night in Genesis literally as being 'arrogant.' To me, it is the exact opposite. It is humility before an almighty and omnipotent God in a struggle to grasp the enormity of His creation. It is looking at Scripture as it is, without the filter of human understanding.

This is God's word to US.......the insignificant creatures. This is HIS choice of words to communicate to us, knowing that we are finite and weak and lacking understanding......knowing our human experience.

I don't presume to know why God chose the word meaning 24 hours to talk about the days of creation, but I have to ask why would He use a specific word meaning a specific thing, and not mean it to be specific? I'm not suggesting that I have absolute knowledge of what God means, nor am I saying that I have absolute knowledge that each day is not a million years.

I just wonder why God would choose to use specific language in communicating His word to us in Genesis, instead of general language used in other portions of Scripture.

I don't presume to know why God chose the word meaning 24 hours to talk about the days of creation,

My choice of the word "arrogant" was not meant to deride any one individual - sorry for offense.

I cannot, however, come to terms with a rigid meaning of the word "day" as it comes to us from the Lord, precisely because it comes from Him, and I am not trying to disparage your interpretation - really, I am not.

I believe, however, that we have reached that wonderful point in the course of this dialouge where we each have decided upon a certain structure of the argument and each have equally compelling cases to make.

Maybe we can agree on this: that, for now, we can accept our differences on the word "day" and leave it for another day?

If you've got about 40 minutes, I recommend that you listen to Hugh Ross in a debate with an agnostic. (If you have an additional 45 minutes, you can listen to the agnostic, but I thought he was an idiot who tried to easily dismiss Ross's arguments with a swipe of his hand.)

This talk will not address the issue of "day." Ross is a strong Christian interested in removing barriers that some people have for faith, but he is an astronomer who believes in an old earth. For that reason he's often criticized by those who interpret the creation account literally, but I think he makes tons of sense. This stuff is really interesting and very, very up to date.

Just click here.