[Fatalis]

The problem for you in that link at #160 is that every example Griggs gives of an alternative word for "yom" that Moses could have used in Genesis 1 to mean either "a continuing event from long ago" or ambiguous time" would also apply to Genesis 2:4, in which you've conceded that "yom" is figurative and not literal.

Griggs doesn't address Genesis 2, so you're left with making an exception in chapter 2 for the Griggs' rule you're relying on for chapter 1. Doesn't seem like much of a rule.

[Dataman]

The problem for you in that link at #160 is that every example Griggs gives of an alternative word for "yom" that Moses could have used in Genesis 1 to mean either "a continuing event from long ago" or ambiguous time" would also apply to Genesis 2:4, in which you've conceded that "yom" is figurative and not literal.

Have we switched our discussion to an analysis of the linked article? I am not inclined to do so. I merely pointed out his mention of how to tell whether a 24 hour period was meant. If you are seriously interested in how Hebrew works, you might want to consult BibChr who has taught the language at the graduate level.

If you think the only reason for holding to 24 hour days is the structure of Genesis, you are mistaken.

Gen 2:4 is and always has been figurative. To acknowledge that is not a concession. But you know that.

Griggs doesn't address Genesis 2, so you're left with making an exception in chapter 2 for the Griggs' rule you're relying on for chapter 1. Doesn't seem like much of a rule.

If you read Gen 2:4, you'd quickly realize that there is no number associated with "day." I believe that was the rule. Did you read it? Or are you being deliberately obtuse?