Replies

I dunno, it seems that a devout Christian insisting on a literal 24-hour day is limiting God just as

Instead of thinking it is limiting God, think of this: I am quoting Him at what He said. He did not say He took undetermned time periods, He said He took 6 days. He did NOT say He let us evolve, He said He created us. See the difference?

This approach is not limiting God, it is trusting what He said as truth. If we cannot trust what He said, why believe it at all? Remember what Satan said?

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said,.....

The arguement that we are limiting God, is actually calling God a liar. It is clear what He said, it says He did it in 6 days. What you might want to ask, is why did it take so long? Why wasn't it immediate? Why take as long as 6 days?

(HINT: It has to do with why we wear clothes, why the family is important, why we worship on a certain instead of others...)

No, I am not calling God a liar, I am recognizing that he can speak any way he wants, and in a myriad of styles, sometimes literal, sometimes figurative. Jesus spoke parables, are you calling him a liar? The Bible is full of symbolic language, poetry, lyrical imagery. I'm not even saying it wasn't a 24-hour day, but since symbolism is clearly used elsewhere in the Bible, it certainly is not out of the realm of possibility that it may be employed here too. He could have done it all in a snap of a finger, but in his much faster mind, 6 days could have fit into one of our seconds. Could go either way, or exactly 6 days. But more importantly, 7 days is a week, a complete unit. So in breaking down creation into days, God could convey to us that it was a process. Maybe in explaining a bit of the process God was conveying the message that he cares for us, and recognizing our curiousity he gives some insight and explanation. He could have just said, "Hey, I snapped my fingers, and it was." But how much more interesting is it that he gave a more in-depth telling of the story for us to fascinate upon, picturing our father mightily creating out of nothing these elements like sea and sky that are so massive and firm to us. Just like a dad telling his kids a story at bedtime of what he did that day, vividly explained in images the children can understand, the children hanging on every word.

If it is so important that God spoke literally in the creation account, than why does he use symbolism elsewhere in the Bible? How is it doubting in any way to recognize that the creation story may be actually allegorical rather than literal? Why would God feel a need to give us a precise historical account of creation? Wasn't he upset when men tried to gain so much knowledge in an attempt to approach him that he confused us at the Tower of Babel? So if a literal account was given, would not that more likely encourage man to attempt to acquire as much knowledge as God? Thus given the fact that God clearly at times takes a Rumsfeld-esque "need to know basis" for what he reveals, I think the logical conclusion is that the creation account is given from God's mystery side, rather than as historical fact.

Would be an interestng study to compare how often God reveal information about himself in a literal factual sense, versus in symbolic and mysterious language. I would bet the latter prevails. However when particular men are discussed in the Bible, it is usually more straightforward. Same for commands and guidance for lifestyle and earthly issues.

This problem is actually resolved from science. We know that time is not constant, from the relativity theory. THere's the old "thought experiment" of two twins, one who goes on a space ship at near the speed of light who barely ages while the other twin on earth is 90 years old. From God's position (a day is like 1,000 years for him) in time it took 7 days; from ours it took eons. We just prefer to try to understand it from his point of view, but in the end, it is literally seven days for God.