Replies

Someone questioned the technical reasons for translating day in Genesis 1 as indefinite period of time. I thought you would be interested in one of the reasons: The key to understanding the series of Yoms in Genesis is in Genesis 2:4 where it says: These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, The Holy Bible : King James Version. 1995 (Ge 2:4). Logos Research Systems, Inc.: Oak Harbor, WA The only conclusion that can be drawn is that Yom in the first chapter also means an indefinite period of time, for God did not make everything in ONE day according to Gen 1. He made it in seven "days". Yet in verse four of Gen 2 the Bible contradicts itself if you insist on a one day (24 hr day)translation. I choose not to have the Bible contradict itself, but to be consistent. I choose to believe that my God is smarter than I am and everyone else. I think God would not make such a simple mistake from one moment to the next. So the only translation that can be made, if one believes in God, is to translate each "day" as a period of time. Then when the summary comes in verse Gen2:4 it translates as "in the period God made", referring to the seven periods previously mentioned. If Genesis first seven "days" were really days, then Genesis 2:4 would have had to say days and not day (yomim not yom). This is only one of several reasons the only conclusion that can be drawn without making God inconsistent or a "liar" is that YOM MEANS PERIOD in this context.

I think God would not make such a simple mistake from one moment to the next. So the only translation that can be made, if one believes in God, is to translate each "day" as a period of time.

I am glad to see that you made use of a Bible tool to aid you in your attack on Scripture and the gospel, for now you have no excuse for not doing an Englishman's search on Strong's #3117 and see for yourself the fruits of your attack on the word 'Yowm'. You may want to review that "quaint" grammar rule that you hold in contempt and see how it really works.

If Moses really wanted to express a literal day in the Genesis 1 narrative, how would he do so differently than by enumerating the individual days, making clear demarcations between the creative events and by throwing the phrase "evening and morning the ____ day"? As a bonus question: How do you mangle the phrase "evening and morning" such where in context it is compatible with "billions of years"? Better still, traditional Darwinian evolution, catastrophism and PE (whatever your version of "truth" you choose for the moment) demand evolution in ALL species ALL the time. According to the Genesis narrative, if for some totally idiotic reason one could swallow the lie that "day" means "billions of years", you have all evolution of aquatic and aviary creations finished at the close of Day Five, and you have evolution of the plants completed on Day Three. To extend the formation of new plants and new critters beyond the "Day-Age" that they are assigned would make for a blurring of the demarcations of time to which they were assigned. To blur the distinctions such as your pet theories would demand would make the allegorical, metaphorical or illustrative purpose of Genesis 1 totally pointless. Or is that your intention, to try to deconstruct Scripture such where it is rendered pointless?

Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Are you going to continue this parade of foolishness of yours and tell us that 'yowm' means "billions of years" in this passage?

The alleged contradiction is only in your mind. For thousands of years, there was no contradiction, there was no problem with the Jews and the Church regarding this matter. But you come along at this day and age and with a wave of your hand declare all of the People of God for thousands and thousands of years to be all wrong and the modern athiests are all right.

I gave you ample opportunity to square the circle regarding how evolution doesn't attempt to destroy the gospel message (that whole death and sin thing) - and you were silent. I gave you opporunity to explain how plants could live and thrive for billions of years before the sun was created to provide light and warmth, and again you were silent. It is quite obvious to everyone that you prefer real contradictions to reason and logic, that you prefer to see violence to the gospel message because you are too arrogant to recognize that you have absolutely no idea on how to execute proper hermeneutics and language study.

Perhaps when you get out of grade school you will recognize that you have much to learn i.e reading crap and garbage on a web site that caters to the Christophobic Cabal proves the GIGO theory.