Evidence for God from Science

Here's where I come from in terms of the creation account and why I can no longer accept a young earth approach.

Aside from the nice litany of Bible verses that I've been presented advocating foolishness. I don't advocate being a fool voluntarily. Proverbs doesn't smile on it. It is pretty sad to appeal to the resurrection being seen as foolishness and then turn foolishness into a virtue, apparently universally on that basis. It's a complete misuse of the intent and context of that verse and an appeal to faith on anything in their position they can't explain. You can't win. Their mind is made up.

YEC'ers are either elevating their doctrine of 24 hour days to the equivalent of the main theme of the Bible, which either diminishes the Gospel and/or elevates their belief to a litmus test for belief. Small wonder the more extreme factions seek to expel otherwise believing people from universities or exclude them from ministry. Rather a tolerant lot. (I know not all do that, but it shows you the extent that it is taken.) Yet, I don't see consistent hermeneutics.

None of this material is unique to me. I'm arranging it on my own however.

Internal Evidence for long days.

1. I accept Genesis 1 as literal not figurative. I believe if you apply one particular principal of explanation to one section of Genesis 1 or 2 then you cannot arbitrarily exclude it from another verse in the same passage unless there is corresponding evidence, within that particular verse to exclude it, or favor a different approach. Therefore, if you allow for any of the 6 days of creation to be longer than 24 hours, you cannot then claim it as an exception and not the rule.

2. Literal understanding does not mean reading the passage in English and then deciding what makes sense to you or what you want it to mean. To understand something literally, you need to read it and seek to put the following elements in place. A. Context B. Historical Understanding. C. Grammar. D. Authors intent. E. Use of literary devices.

Claiming a "literal" understanding is the plain understanding of Biblical text without all these elements in place usually leads to misunderstanding at best, or heresy at worst.

Forgive me for pointing that out. I have a degree in Biblical Literature. I can't ignore this element.

3. The Hebrew words used in Genesis 1 and 2 which generate the most excitement in this regard are:

"Yom" which means either,

A. The daylight hours of a day as opposed to the dark hours.

Example Genesis 8:22

"As long as the earth endures,
seedtime and harvest,
cold and heat,
summer and winter,
day and night
will never cease."

B. A 24 hour period of time.

Example Genesis 39:10

10 And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her.


C. A period of Time of unspecified length without any reference to solar days.

Example Genesis 2:4

4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens-

Other examples of the use of "yom" in this context includes: Gen 4:3 (long time), Gen 30:14 (season of harvest), Joshua 24:7 where it means a long season, and Isaiah 4:2 where it means a future era.

The words used for morning and evening also apply to the beginning and ending of a specific period of time, not just a 24 hour day.

In view of this, there is a literal basis in Genesis 1 to indicate that creation took place in an orderly and measured manner. While it can remain a possibility that God did it in 24 hour days with the word "yom" used it is not the only possibility. In fact, if Moses, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, intended to mean a long period of time what do you think the best Hebrew word to use would be? That's right. "YOM!!"

Moses was the human author of Gen 1 and 2. He was also the author of Psalm 90. Including the passage that states, ""For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by..." While it certainly would be a stretch to tie this passage as the basis for defining a day in Genesis, it is significant because the writer here is the same one God inspired to write Genesis 1. This demonstrates that Moses was aware of the relativity of time in the context of God. At the very least, it should give 24 hour day creationists pause to consider the other possibilities.

The first use of "yom" in Genesis is in 1:5 where it is used to mean the light portion of the first period of time. So, the first usage of the word in the passage does not mean a 24 hour period of time. That should be a clue that not every usage in that passage necessarily equates to a 24 hour day. Combine that with the use in Gen 2:4 which even young earth creationists concede means a period of time and you have a grammatical, contextual, literal basis to question what the meaning is in other usages.

Whatever the usage, one would expect that the ordinal "yoms" should be consistent in their meaning moving from 1 - 6. Given the formula is similar, it's reasonable to assume that the meanings are similar.

So, if 1 of those days has internal reason to question a 24 hour day, then similarly, the others fall to that similar usage.

There are strong reasons to suppose that this is case for the following reasons.

1. The events of the 6th day require more than 24 hours due to the activities of Adam. Separating the activities of God from Adam and claiming a dual sense of the use of "yom" where it means 24 hours in reference to God and a long period of time for Adam, is not supported contextually, grammatically or historically. It in fact introduces an element of translation that is in fact, less literal. It's very ironic to me that those arguing for the "simplest" translation then jump in this day to make the most convoluted translation attempted by any camp.

To hold to a 24 hour day in day 6 you have to believe that all this happened in that period of time:

(1) God created the higher forms of animals, (2) God created Adam, (3) God planted a garden in Eden, (4) God made to grow the vegetation in Eden, (5) God gave Adam the responsibility for tending the garden, (6) Adam became lonely, (7) God had Adam name all of the animals, in search of a companion, (8.) Adam was still lonely after this, (9) God put Adam into a deep sleep and made Eve from his rib, (10) Eve was presented to Adam as his new partner, and finally (11) God gave them instructions to multiply and care for the earth. (See Genesis 1:24-30; 2:4-24). How could all of these events have been completed in only twenty-four hours? At the very least, they would have taken several months.

Add to this Adam's reaction when Eve is presented to him. This "at last" is bone of my bone.

Apparently Adam had A.D.D. He got bored quickly.

The best argument I've experienced and one that made me think hard was the argument that the use of ordinal numbers with "yom" always means 24 hour days. Further review showed another instance. Hosea 6:2. The use of yom in the instance of 2 or 3 "days" has almost universally been understood through prophetic history to mean at least a year or more for each time period. So that argument fails, from biblical evidence itself to say nothing of the fact that that "rule" is not found to be consistent in common Hebrew Usage.

In short, long periods of time are the literal sense of Genesis 1. YEC is not only bad science, it is bad theology. Rejecting bad theology does not diminish Scripture. In fact, theology is only as true as it reflects the truth of Scripture.

YEC'ers love to equate their beliefs as "believing" the Bible, thus inferring that those who reject their tortured misinterpretation of Genesis must therefore reject the Bible. It's an argument of personal attack in that regard, not one of conviction.

So there you go. That's what I think, proof-texted and spelled out.

God is a God of order, and it pleased Him to do the things He did in the order He did them in. You cannot and we must not restrict God to our natural view of Spiritual creation.

Day age is also a sense of order. It even has more order. The Big Bang was the biggest explosion there ever was, yet instead of chaos which an explosion normally brings, this one brought order.

Taking the young earth position is depending on a text that has had its context come into question and flies in the face of all the evidence that has been gathered about our world. We know that people were living in the city of Jericho for at least 10,000 years.

Simply, if you walked into a mansion built today, you would know that it was not built during a day. Why? There is evidence everywhere that time was taken to lay the foundations and build the house up. Likewise, the evidence everywhere in science proves that it took a long, long time for the universe to develop. Longer than 6000 years. Longer than millions of years. Billions of years. Could God have made everything in a second? Yes, but He choose not to. The fact that anything exists at all testifies to that.

When we see a supernova explode 300 million light years away, that means according to your reasoning that the light left the supernova before there was even a star or the universe to have the light come from!!

Kurieuo wrote:As has been previously corrected, only YECs tend to believe the Sun was created on day 4.

Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Gen 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Gen 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Gen 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

What do you suppose the greater and lesser lights are if not the sun and moon?

IRQ Conflict wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:As has been previously corrected, only YECs tend to believe the Sun was created on day 4.

Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Gen 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Gen 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Gen 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

What do you suppose the greater and lesser lights are if not the sun and moon?

I believe the appearance is per the persepctive from the surface of the earth as the atmosphere cleared of dust and allowed the seeing of the source.

Not necessarily the most satisfactory explanation, but then better than whatever explanation you've yet to offer as to how 24 days existed without the sun.

IRQ Conflict wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:As has been previously corrected, only YECs tend to believe the Sun was created on day 4.

Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Gen 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Gen 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Gen 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

What do you suppose the greater and lesser lights are if not the sun and moon?

If you looked at the Day-Age interpretation I provided earlier you wouldn't need to ask this. It doesn't hurt to read a different position does it? Try http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/genesis1.html

Or for my own account you can read an old post of mine at http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... c&start=11.

Kurieuo

IRQ Conflict wrote:Jbuza, don't fret over answers that no man can answer.

Trust in God with all your mind.

The biggest thing I take away from the passage, is how much God loved the man that he would create this whole universe, set man up in a special Garden that he planted, and bring forth all wonders of creatures before the man's eyes to see what the man would think of the things that his God was creating for him.


WWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!


We see from the passage after Noah comes out of the ark stating that God would put enmity?(sp) between the man and the animals that Adam and the animals may have gotten along just fine, perhaps even friends.


But the thought that I take away is the man sitting on a rock or such and almighty God bringing great creations forth from the earth, and bringing them to the man to see what the man would call them.

The rest like you say, IRQ, is the ways of God and no man will comprehend them.

God Bless
Jon

Canuckster1127 wrote:...

To hold to a 24 hour day in day 6 you have to believe that all this happened in that period of time:

(1) God created the higher forms of animals,

Yes

(2) God created Adam,

Yes

(3) God planted a garden in Eden,

Opinion here I think. One interpretation for the planting of the garden is 'in advance of' Eden. In other words, east of Eden may mean before Eden. He may have done the planting on day 3, when the plants were created.

(4) God made to grow the vegetation in Eden,

Same as above. Nevertheless it does indicate a fantastic growth rate, where in only days, trees could grow!!!! How unlike the present.

(5) God gave Adam the responsibility for tending the garden,

Yes, this could have taken 30 seconds. 'Adam, take care of the garden'

(6) Adam became lonely

,

No. Where does it say that the woman was made on the same day Adam was? Nowhere, I ever heard of.

(7) God had Adam name all of the animals, in search of a companion,

No. Where does it say this happened the day Adam was created? Nowhere.

(8.) Adam was still lonely after this, (9) God put Adam into a deep sleep and made Eve from his rib,

No, I assume this was much later. Prove it if you claim day 6.

(10) Eve was presented to Adam as his new partner, and finally

Not the day he was made, no.

(11) God gave them instructions to multiply and care for the earth.

Not that day, no.

(See Genesis 1:24-30; 2:4-24). How could all of these events have been completed in only twenty-four hours? At the very least, they would have taken several months.

I agree. Never have I thought this was all the same day.

Add to this Adam's reaction when Eve is presented to him. This "at last" is bone of my bone.

Apparently Adam had A.D.D. He got bored quickly.

Again, who claims it was day 6 in creation week here? Sounds like someone is confusing chapter 2 here?

The best argument I've experienced and one that made me think hard was the argument that the use of ordinal numbers with "yom" always means 24 hour days. Further review showed another instance. Hosea 6:2. The use of yom in the instance of 2 or 3 "days" has almost universally been understood through prophetic history to mean at least a year or more for each time period. So that argument fails, from biblical evidence itself to say nothing of the fact that that "rule" is not found to be consistent in common Hebrew Usage.

The 'rule' is a preponderance of scriptures in balance, the usual meaning, and what seems to be being said, I would think. A day is usually a day, not rocket science, this.

In short, long periods of time are the literal sense of Genesis 1.

No, in no way, that is nonsense.

If you read the original hebrew version, the following verse seems to be translated slightly off.

This is the NIV.
Genesis 1:11
Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so.

It's more like, Let the land bring forth vegetation: and bring forth the seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, ." And it was so.

It seems he created things which were endowed with powers and in turn continued his creation. This either shows a rapid growth of vegetation, or that Yom is indeed not a litteral 24 hour period. The laws of the universe are an expression of God's logic, why would he change the laws? His own laws? To fit a litteral interpretation?

In the Catholic Church the various bishops, preists, etc use a latin translation, much closer to the original.
Perhaps those who read the bible litteraly should try to see if the litteral interpretation works with the original translation?

Jewish Interpretations
http://www.js.emory.edu/BLUMENTHAL/GenIntro.html

The Hebrew Bible in English
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0101.htm

Other Links.
http://www.grisda.org/origins/21005.htm
http://www.bible-researcher.com/rashi.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=4761360
http://www.yashanet.com/library/missing_link.htm

dad wrote:

(6) Adam became lonely

,

No. Where does it say that the woman was made on the same day Adam was? Nowhere, I ever heard of.

(7) God had Adam name all of the animals, in search of a companion,

No. Where does it say this happened the day Adam was created? Nowhere.

(8.) Adam was still lonely after this, (9) God put Adam into a deep sleep and made Eve from his rib,

No, I assume this was much later. Prove it if you claim day 6.

(10) Eve was presented to Adam as his new partner, and finally

Not the day he was made, no.

Genesis 1
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
...
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

Kurieuo

Good to see your paying attention Kurieuo But then again mayby God meant that He was thinking of creating Eve on the sixth day, not that He actually did it. [/sarcasm]

I'm going to study a bit more on the cardinal and ordinal numering systems before I post again. It seems to me That God knew 'plain english' wasn't going to cut the mustard with some.

Jbuza, here you go!

Canuckster1127 wrote:
I know the Genesis passage is not that clear and there are legitimate problems. The problem with my own rhetorical statement above is that if we accepted equal light and darkness in the context of a large age, we might violate many physical laws if that light is associated with heat. Of course, God could have done something outside of the physical laws we currently understand. Once we adopt that posture however then all reason leaves. We may as well argue that the Earth is 5 minutes old and we were all placed here with contrived memories.

There are problems on both sides. We all need to approach it with some humility and willingness to admit we don't understand everything. Once we make an assertion however, it behooves us to defend it and face the implications that posiition gives rise to.

I certainly agree with you, we DO "need to approach it with some humility and willingness to admit we don't understand everything". I will so respect an "I don't know" answer over some glibb responce or insincere effort.

I realize by my question I am placing you in a difficult position of trying to over come something that I see as a very major problem. I'm sorry for that but this is all new to me and since this is the OEC assertion (huge chunks of time for each day) it's for OEC to help me to understand. I need some reasonable answers, I already have the questions. (Don't need help in that department ) I would appreciate anyones input on this.
To 'my' minds logic, I can't see how the OEC would overcome the problem with the amount of time that would be spent in darkness with no heat and how any of the green stuff could possibly survive.
Input anyone?

Shortcake wrote:To 'my' minds logic, I can't see how the OEC would overcome the problem with the amount of time that would be spent in darkness with no heat and how any of the green stuff could possibly survive.
Input anyone?

It might be a hard task, but it may involve actually reading replies to you. In any case, you need to understand the position you disagree with better—read the links within my second last post before this one.

Kurieuo

dad wrote:

Canuckster1127 wrote:...

To hold to a 24 hour day in day 6 you have to believe that all this happened in that period of time:

(1) God created the higher forms of animals,

Yes

(2) God created Adam,

Yes

(3) God planted a garden in Eden,

Opinion here I think. One interpretation for the planting of the garden is 'in advance of' Eden. In other words, east of Eden may mean before Eden. He may have done the planting on day 3, when the plants were created.

(4) God made to grow the vegetation in Eden,

Same as above. Nevertheless it does indicate a fantastic growth rate, where in only days, trees could grow!!!! How unlike the present.

(5) God gave Adam the responsibility for tending the garden,

Yes, this could have taken 30 seconds. 'Adam, take care of the garden'

(6) Adam became lonely

,

No. Where does it say that the woman was made on the same day Adam was? Nowhere, I ever heard of.

(7) God had Adam name all of the animals, in search of a companion,

No. Where does it say this happened the day Adam was created? Nowhere.

(8.) Adam was still lonely after this, (9) God put Adam into a deep sleep and made Eve from his rib,

No, I assume this was much later. Prove it if you claim day 6.

(10) Eve was presented to Adam as his new partner, and finally

Not the day he was made, no.

(11) God gave them instructions to multiply and care for the earth.

Not that day, no.

(See Genesis 1:24-30; 2:4-24). How could all of these events have been completed in only twenty-four hours? At the very least, they would have taken several months.

I agree. Never have I thought this was all the same day.

Add to this Adam's reaction when Eve is presented to him. This "at last" is bone of my bone.

Apparently Adam had A.D.D. He got bored quickly.

Again, who claims it was day 6 in creation week here? Sounds like someone is confusing chapter 2 here?

The best argument I've experienced and one that made me think hard was the argument that the use of ordinal numbers with "yom" always means 24 hour days. Further review showed another instance. Hosea 6:2. The use of yom in the instance of 2 or 3 "days" has almost universally been understood through prophetic history to mean at least a year or more for each time period. So that argument fails, from biblical evidence itself to say nothing of the fact that that "rule" is not found to be consistent in common Hebrew Usage.

The 'rule' is a preponderance of scriptures in balance, the usual meaning, and what seems to be being said, I would think. A day is usually a day, not rocket science, this.

In short, long periods of time are the literal sense of Genesis 1.

No, in no way, that is nonsense.

Hmmm .... So your response is to claim that elements of day 6 are not intended to fit the Chronological order established in day 1-5.

Are you willing to be consistent with this interpretation or are you being arbitrary? It seems you are abandoning what is generally asserted to be a literal interpretation here for a formula that picks and chooses what elements to confine to creation chronology in order to fit your own needs to support your theological theory for 24 hour days, even if it requires rationalizing away the text. Isn't that what you (not necessarily you personally, but certainly this has been a pattern of YEC supporters in general) accuse people disagreeing with your position of?

When Genesis 1 states God created them, man, Male and Female on the Sixth day, are you then rejecting the further expansion of Genesis 2 in that context?

Fly-by answers such as you have provided here don't really help your case. If you're serious about applying 24 hour days, I think you need something much better than this.

Kurieuo wrote:....Genesis 1
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
...
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

Thank you. Seems you are right, I missed that, or never really focused in on that point, or something. I assumed there was some time there.
.. . OK, so, if Adam named the animals the first day, I am happy to hear that. This indicates that there was hyper evolution pretty clearly, because as we see, there weren't that many animals originally created to name! For example, say there was only 2 cats, sort of like a house cat. (I don't know this, for all I know, there was one pair of lions, tigers, as well, etc) Adam names them. AS time goes by, especially after the flood, a need for great adaptations arises, and that cat family branches out. Same with Elephants, just the one pair, later, mamoths, etc from that. One dog pair, etc. Wouldn't take long at all. Especiallly if God brought them over right to the man to name, maybe as they were created, or whatever?! See, this would help explain why no fossils of most mamals and birds, etc showed up till later in the record. They were all right here, save those trilobites, and plants that were made for the planet at large, outside of Eden.
But thanks for the tidbit.

Canuckster1127 wrote: To hold to a 24 hour day in day 6 you have to believe that all this happened in that period of time:

(1) God created the higher forms of animals,

Yes

(2) God created Adam,

Yes

(3) God planted a garden in Eden,

Opinion here I think. One interpretation for the planting of the garden is 'in advance of' Eden. In other words, east of Eden may mean before Eden. He may have done the planting on day 3, when the plants were created.

(4) God made to grow the vegetation in Eden,

Same as above. Nevertheless it does indicate a fantastic growth rate, where in only days, trees could grow!!!! How unlike the present.

(5) God gave Adam the responsibility for tending the garden,

Yes, this could have taken 30 seconds. 'Adam, take care of the garden'

(6) Adam became lonely

,

[edited Yes!]

(7) God had Adam name all of the animals, in search of a companion,

[edited Yes!]

(8.) Adam was still lonely after this, (9) God put Adam into a deep sleep and made Eve from his rib,

[edited Yes!]

(10) Eve was presented to Adam as his new partner, and finally

Not the day he was made, no.

(11) God gave them instructions to multiply and care for the earth.

[edited Yes!]

In short, long periods of time are the literal sense of Genesis 1.

No, in no way, that is nonsense.[/quote]
I edited my old reply with corrections, seems like woman was made on day 6. Unless anyone can point out something we missed here?

Hmmm .... So your response is to claim that elements of day 6 are not intended to fit the Chronological order established in day 1-5.

No, Chap 1 is the order, I guess woman was made the same day.

Are you willing to be consistent with this interpretation or are you being arbitrary? It seems you are abandoning what is generally asserted to be a literal interpretation here for a formula that picks and chooses what elements to confine to creation chronology in order to fit your own needs to support your theological theory for 24 hour days, even if it requires rationalizing away the text. Isn't that what you (not necessarily you personally, but certainly this has been a pattern of YEC supporters in general) accuse people disagreeing with your position of?

I think I addressed that already.


So, woman on the sixth day, fine with me. Makes sense, I always kind of wondered why all the animals got to have mates, but Adam had to wait so long! Great, God is cool after all.