I'm reading in an NIV version in Genesis 1, and it has phrases like: "And there was evening, and there was morning-the second day."
It is possible to assume this is talking about a sideriel day - and I believe a lot of folks draw that conclusion. It is not impossible, again, to interpret this as being a day in the life of God - which, of course, spans all time.
Beyond that, I'm drawing a blank of a distinct reference from the Book that identifies the length of day as a sidereal day.
The Hebrew word 'olam' is the word which refers to a period of time and is translated Day, as in Day of the Lord.
Consider also that the text also says "God called the light, 'day', and the darkness he called 'night'." That's pretty literal language if it's meant to be just symbolism, isn't it?
My bottom line continues to be, why should I not believe in creation story in Genesis literally? And if I don't, does that mean that I don't believe the rest of Genesis literally? For me it's what we often call a 'slippery slope.'
I'm in total agreement with you, Guenevere.......God's power is amazing, and the Grand Canyon is a perfect example of it. He could make the mountains and the canyons with a fingertip, a flood, or even just a word! Awesome!!
Did you know that scientists now acknowledge that the Colorado River could, in no way have caused the Grand Canyon.......but that hasn't filtered down to the innocent children in public schools who are being force fed 'facts' about evolution that are in no way factual.