pinging you to my last comment because I’ve seen this ‘Day’ ‘First’ Argument quite a bit in discussions abotu creation and theistic evoltuion many times, and upon investigation of hte issue- the claims of Day/First don’t hold up for hte reasons I posted above which came from thel ink here:
http://creation.com/the-meaning-of-yom-in-genesis-1
Not sure how to ping the others/multiple folks, but they might be interested too as the claim does crop up quite a bit- and studyign Hebrew shows that htere simpyl is no reason to think that the creation record in God’s word is talking abotu anythign other than 7 literal 24 hour days- regardless of how vehemently soem may try to push the idea- We ‘ignant literalists’ can rest assured that God’s truth stands on it’s own two feet, and that the precision of the Hebrew Language, and repeated patterns throughout God’s word concenring similiar situations/lists etc back up the faqct that God infact did create the world in 6 literal days- and that sin and death did not enter the world until AFTER man sinend i nthe garden at which point ALL of creation groaned under the strain of sin and death-
Thanks for the ping.
Philosophy is not my thing and some of what you and The_Reader_David have been discussing has gone right over my head. However, I think a-g and bb would find this intriguing.
The only thing about about the literal 6 day creation that I have the most difficulty with is when creationists claim that the earth is 6,000 years old. I know someone who is fluent in Hebrew and he told me once, decades ago, that in the Hebrew, there is a change of tense between the first and second verses of Genesis one, indicating that an unknown amount of time passed between creation being spoken and God working on the earth to make it habitable.
I don’t have a problem with God creating the universe in 6 days with the appearance of age. I know the typical arguments that the evos use accusing God of deception for doing that, but what they fail to recognize is that creating with the appearance of age can be for sheer usefulness. Adam was created with the appearance of age, not to deceive, but as a practical matter. He had to in order for man to procreate. There’s simply no way of having a human grow from fertilized egg to adult without somewhere for that egg to grow.
I think that the forensic evidence found in the fossil record supports special creation. There are simply too many breaks and jumps in evolution with an appalling lack of intermediate forms to support the ToE as evos put it forth.
There is an interesting take on reconciling the apparent age of the universe with the literal six day creation and it has to do with time dilation. I find it intriguing and I do not think it at all compromises the integrity of Scripture.
The Age of the Universe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1576941/posts