That argument can be turned completely upside down. Why must you believe that it was created in a literal six days? Why do you suppose if He could have, He must have? Were you their to witness creation? Why is your concept of God so limited? If God exists (and I know He does), then omniscience, omnipotence, and eternal existence are His attributes, and they are His attributes in the fullest, most complete measure. If not, then there is no God, which is a stark and utter impossibility, because what is all around us, the very fact that we exist, is proof that there is a God in heaven. Take His omnipotence as an example. If He is omnipotent, doesn't that mean He is all-powerful? He can do anything, in any way, at any time, and there are no limitations on that whatsoever. 6 literal days to create the universe? He could have done the whole thing instantaneously!
The Bible, by stating that He did in six days, must have been trying to communicate something more than just how long it physically took God to draw up plans (what with I dont know since the pencil had not yet been created), gather the resources needed (but where did they come from?) and do the physical labor required to create all that exists. Now admittedly that is silly. If God created the world, he didnt NEED six days in which to do it. He could have thought the thought and instant creation.
The fact that the Genesis story explains creation in six days and lays out the six progressive steps in the creation of the universe and Earthly life tells me that God was giving Man a description of how things began that was understandable to the nomadic sheepherders that first heard it, and is still relevant to those of us in a more scientific era.
You make an attempt to discredit my question by turning it inside out, but it still doesn't answer the question, and in fact establishes my original point. The question addresses the belief by some that there is no possible way that God could have created the universe in 6 literal days. I say, why not? He could have done it instantaneously, for that matter. There is the account in Genensis that states that after each "day" of creation, God looked at it and pronounced it "good". Certainly, the day referred to might not be a literal 24 hour day. I never said that it "must" be. I am simply stating that to say that it "couldn't" be is to place limits on God, and shows an underlying lack of understanding of the concpt of God as a being, and as a Creator. I am not placing limitations on God. He can, and does, do as He wills, and we, a part of creation, have no say in the matter, and certainly no right to challenge Him about it. The only limitations on God are those He places on Himself, not for His sake, but for ours. Whether or not He created the universe in 6 literal days or not is not a matter that will have any real bearing on our standing before Him, or the state of our salvation (a subject which I'm not even addressing here, that's a whole other kettle of fish, as it were). What I fight for, and believe is the fact that in reality, it takes even more faith to believe in evolution and all it's attempts to explain by purely natural processes the coming into being and existence of life, than it does to believe that God created it all, and therefore there is a Creator with whom we must deal, and are responsible to. THAT is what evolutionists just can't bear, the idea that God has a right to impose control over, and expect us to be accountable for ourselves and the part of Creation placed in our care and use. Since we are a part of His Creation, we are beholden to Him, and He does have a right to have expectations of us.
I can't say that I believe you must believe in a literal six days to be a Christian. I would never put that on anyone. But I am going to tell you why I stopped challenging the literal six days. I'm going to presume that you are an evolutionary Christian. If you aren't please forgive the assumption and still read the post. I was like you once. I believed G-d created the universe and He used evolution as His way to get us to where we are now. Then someone asked me, "If you challenge that part of the Bible, how do you choose which parts to believe?"
He had me stumped. The Bible says that homosexuality is not normal. Science tells us it is. Which do I believe? The Bible says that humanity is born with an evil inclination. Science tells us that man is born good. Which do I believe? Ultimately I came to notice that every time someone said something like, "The Bible may say that, but what it really means is..." to me, this person was looking for a way to avoid taking G-d seriously, not looking for a way to understand G-d and His creation better. This may not be true for you, but it was true for most, and I have to admit it was true for me. In other words, I came to realize that I was challenging the six day creation in order to be able to challenge the Bible in areas where it spoke more directly to my life. I came to the decision point in my life, and I chose.
I believe the Bible is the true and inerrant Word of God in everything it says. When the Bible seems to be in conflict with Science, I will patiently wait for Science to figure out where it went wrong.
Please don't take this as an attack on you. I don't even know you. But I do know me. If there is something here for you, accept it. If not, just scroll on by.
Shalom.
The six days is not just mentioned in Genesis. For example; Exodus 31:17 - It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he abstained from work and rested.'"
Another significant problem is that if there was no First Adam, then there is no Second Adam.
As far as "Genesis being "created three or four thousand years ago for nomadic sheep hearders", and being "spread by aural tradition for hundreds of years if not longer before it was eventually written down, reportedly by Moses", may I suggest that you take a look at the tablet theory of Genesis authorship, which makes a lot more sense from an archeological standpoint.
Cordially,