There are two different types of figures of speech that make comparisons. You were right in that a simile uses “like” or “as”, but a metaphor makes a comparison but it looks like a statement. You have to decide whether it is a statement or a metaphor based on the language around the phrase. Based on the fact that this phrase is surrounded by similes I would argue it is safe to say that it’s a metaphor!
Oh, I agree too! But the issue then becomes that the Bible is NOT a literal, word-for-word exact copy of the Word of God. It is to be interpreted and read with an eye looking for not the literal, but the metaphorical truths within.
Which kind of completely destroys the whole YEC foundation, based upon counting people and times as listed in the Bible.
My fundamental point: if you claim that the Biblical account of creation, and that the Biblical account of Noah's flood are 100% factual in their claims, then you must accept the words of the Bible as presented as inerrant, meaning that of the two translations GGG has provided, one of them is wrong and an abomination.
If you accept the Bible as a metaphorical and theological book describing the relationship of man to God, then the whole need and desire for a YEC standpoint becomes irrelevant; whether God created the earth 6000 or 6 billion years ago is not an issue. Whether God literally formed dust into man and made it flesh, or used the process of evolution is of no consequence. What matters is that God did it.
One of the reasons that jihadi Muslims are so dangerous is because of their slavish devotion to the literal words of the Qu'ran. Unfortunately, for many YECers and jihadi Christians, they have the same slavish devotion to the literal words, not the content behind them.
The original poster, GGG, has already been hoisted on his own petard by showing that two different translations of the Bible show different words. So now he has to reconcile why he either believes the first version he quoted - where the bones are literally tubes of bronze - is wrong (and if so, why would he use it to justify his position), or explain how the second version - the KJV, acknowledged over centuries as the "right" translation - is wrong because it makes the simile explicit as well as changes the metal (from bronze to brass).
Or, he could just sit back and realize that literal interpretations of the Bible not only don't work, but are in fact theologically stunting, and lead one to a restricted understanding of the nature and promise of God.