Announcement

Collapse

Applied Protology 201 Guidelines

This forum is for Christian creationists (YEC and OEC) only, and we ask that conversations be kept civil and with brotherly charity.

Deistic notions or even theistic evolutionary* notions are excluded from this forum.

This area is not to be used to bash organizations that promote a Cosmological view different from your own (ie AiG or RTB).


The purpose of this area is to provide a safe haven for fellow creationists to discuss their differences away from the hostility that normally accompanies such discussion. While disagreements are inevitable, the purpose of this forum is for fellow believers to discuss their differences in a civil manner. If you are unable to discuss differences in Cosmogony in a civil manner, then this forum is NOT for you!!!!!

There have been some issues as to who is allowed to post in this area and who is not. TheologyWeb had very specific goals and ideas in mind when setting up this area, and this is an attempt to clarify. This forum is for creationists only. This is not simply naturalism plus a belief in God or gods. So in other words, the question that a poster must ask himself is this: In what significant ways do my views on the origin of life and the universe differ from a non-theistic materialistic view practically speaking? If there are no significant differences, then this forum is not for you. The purpose is for persons who believe in a very active and significant “creation” process. All theists will by definition have some metaphysical elements, that is not the deciding factor here. Also simply a belief in the supernatural special creation of man or the infusion of a specially created soul is not the deciding factor. Of course those things are important, but that is not the sum and substance of the types of discussions here in which this would be a significant difference in the debate discussions.


Fairly speaking, we at TheologyWeb ask the posters not to look for “loopholes” or ways that their views could “fit.” If a poster frankly would not be considered a “creationist” in general vernacular, then we ask that such do not participate in this section in good faith. This is not done as a judgment or criticism against any theist whose views do not fall within the purview of this forum, it is simply to insure that the goals and intent of the spirit of the intentions of TheologyWeb are carried out. This is not said in maliciousness at all, and we totally ask for the respect of our members to the spirit in which this forum was created, for creationists (and ID advocates) as generally understood. There may certainly be Christians who do not qualify for this forum and that is not meant as a slur or insinuation against them. Salvation is not dependent upon our creation beliefs which are a secondary, in-house issue, though of course important.

Do not be offended or combative if a Moderator contacts you with a request for clarification of your beliefs and that sometimes the judgment calls of what is within the guidelines here can be gray. Please grant us the benefit of the doubt.

Due to the rash of recent "hostile" threads, the Cosmogony forum guidelines have been updated in an effort to 1) Clarify the purpose of this forum and 2) to prevent a repeat of the recent unpleasantries.


The purpose of the Cosmogony area has always been to provide a “safe haven” for civil discourse between fellow believers who happen to have opposing views on creation. It was our intent that the common ground of belief in deity and belief in some type of special creation would be enough to keep the discussion civil.

However, just the opposite has occurred. The Cosmogony area is one of the most contentious areas of TWeb. In order to return this area to “safe haven” it was designed to be, the area will be placed under greater moderator scrutiny until you guys lean to behave.

This means that personal attacks on posters, attacks on the Christianity of supporters of views that you do not hold, attacks on Christian organizations that support views that you do not hold, and hostile behavior in general will be subject to moderator intervention. However, what constitutes an “attack” is still up to the discretion of the moderators.

Posters who are habitually edited for hostile/aggressive post will have their access to this forum removed.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact the moderator(s) of this area.



Like everywhere else at Tweb, the regular rules apply:


Forum Rules: Here

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

*Theistic evolution is a position somewhere between evolution and creationism. It says that God created the substance of our universe and the guided it into what we have today via the evolutionary process.
See more
See less

How long were the days?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How long were the days?

    One issue that people disagree over is how long the six days of creation were. Some people think they were literal 24 hour days and some think that they were merely long time periods of indefinite length. Which side is correct? Is it even possible that both views are wrong?

    Sometimes the word “day” is used in the Bible to denote a long period of time. For example, the time of God’s judgment at the end of the age is called the Day of the Lord. And in Genesis 2:4 the entire creation period is called a day.
    These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.

    But could the days of creation have been such indeterminate periods of time?

    The first day is described in Genesis 1:3-5.
    And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

    The day included a period of light and a period of darkness. This day and each of those that followed it are described as consisting of an evening and a morning. It is clear that these were literal days, each one consisting of one rotation of the earth on its axis.

    Does this mean they were 24 hour days like the ones we have today? That would depend on whether the earth rotated at the same speed then that it does today.

    The worldwide flood in Noah’s time involved more that just covering the world with water. The fact that the water in the oceans once covered the whole world shows that the surface of the earth was much flatter before the flood. After the flood the continents and islands rose up so that they were above the water.
    The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth.
    Psalm 104:8-9 ESV

    Changes of this magnitude could have changed the speed of the earth’s rotation and thus changed the length of the day.

    The earliest calendars that we have any record of are based on a 360 day year with extra days added to bring the calendar into alignment with the seasons. Why didn’t they simple develop a 365 days calendar to begin with? One possible explanation is that before the flood there were only 360 days in a year and the first civilizations after the flood retained the old calendars instead of making new ones.

    To calculate the possible length of a preflood day I first found the number of minutes in the extra 5 1/4 days. The result was 7,560 minutes. I then divided this by the 360 days and got 21 minutes. If our days were 21 minutes longer there would be 360 days in the year and the earliest calendars would have been accurate and not needed any adjustments. It seems possible that the days of creation were actually 24 hours and 21 minutes long.
    The brutal, soul-shaking truth is that we are so earthly minded we are of no heavenly use.
    Leonard Ravenhill

    https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/

  • #2
    Not only that, but the creation week was compared to a normal work week in Exodus.

    Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      One issue that people disagree over is how long the six days of creation were. Some people think they were literal 24 hour days and some think that they were merely long time periods of indefinite length. Which side is correct? Is it even possible that both views are wrong?
      You seem to be primarily describing the common YEC view and the "day-age" OEC view. Keep in mind that there are more views as well.

      Some argue that the Days are literal 24-hour days, but that there are long, indeterminate periods of time BETWEEN the days.

      Some argue that the Days are not days of creation, but "days of communication" in which God communicated either what He was about to do ("days of proclamation") or what He had done ("days of revelation" or "visionary days").

      Some argue that the whole account is a literary structure, essentially a parable, using normal days to describe something which may have occurred in a different sequence over a different timescale (the "Framework Hypothesis").

      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      Sometimes the word “day” is used in the Bible to denote a long period of time. For example, the time of God’s judgment at the end of the age is called the Day of the Lord. And in Genesis 2:4 the entire creation period is called a day.
      These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.

      But could the days of creation have been such indeterminate periods of time?

      The first day is described in Genesis 1:3-5.
      And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

      The day included a period of light and a period of darkness. This day and each of those that followed it are described as consisting of an evening and a morning. It is clear that these were literal days, each one consisting of one rotation of the earth on its axis.
      No, it is NOT at all clear that these were "literal days". Some of the early church fathers (Origen?) argued that the first three Days could NOT be normal days, since the sun was not created until Day 4.

      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      Does this mean they were 24 hour days like the ones we have today? That would depend on whether the earth rotated at the same speed then that it does today.

      The worldwide flood in Noah’s time involved more that just covering the world with water. The fact that the water in the oceans once covered the whole world shows that the surface of the earth was much flatter before the flood. After the flood the continents and islands rose up so that they were above the water.
      Here you are forcing your interpretation of a "worldwide flood". The Flood may well have been local or regional.

      The land would have had to be very flat. If all of the water in earth's ice caps were melted, the sea level rise would be less than 80 meters (http://pumas.nasa.gov/files/02_10_97_1.pdf).

      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place that you appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth.
      Psalm 104:8-9 ESV
      First, in the context of Psalm 104, this is describing Day 3a of creation, NOT Noah's Flood. (See Keil & Delitzsch, for example.)

      Second, the Hebrew here is somewhat difficult and ambiguous, but I believe that the NIV here is a better fit to both the Hebrew grammar and the context:
      But at your rebuke the waters fled,
      at the sound of your thunder they took to flight;
      they flowed over the mountains,
      they went down into the valleys,
      to the place you assigned for them.
      You set a boundary they cannot cross;
      never again will they cover the earth.
      Psalm 104:7-9 NIV11

      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      Changes of this magnitude could have changed the speed of the earth’s rotation and thus changed the length of the day.
      Why and how? Any change to the earth's moment of inertia would be pretty small.

      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      The earliest calendars that we have any record of are based on a 360 day year with extra days added to bring the calendar into alignment with the seasons. Why didn’t they simple develop a 365 days calendar to begin with? One possible explanation is that before the flood there were only 360 days in a year and the first civilizations after the flood retained the old calendars instead of making new ones.
      Another possibility is that they simply rounded the number.

      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      To calculate the possible length of a preflood day I first found the number of minutes in the extra 5 1/4 days. The result was 7,560 minutes. I then divided this by the 360 days and got 21 minutes. If our days were 21 minutes longer there would be 360 days in the year and the earliest calendars would have been accurate and not needed any adjustments. It seems possible that the days of creation were actually 24 hours and 21 minutes long.
      Possibly, but this is quite speculative.
      Last edited by Kbertsche; 12-14-2015, 01:51 PM.
      "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." – Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Kbertsche View Post
        Some argue that the Days are literal 24-hour days, but that there are long, indeterminate periods of time BETWEEN the days.

        Some argue that the Days are not days of creation, but "days of communication" in which God communicated either what He was about to do ("days of proclamation") or what He had done ("days of revelation" or "visionary days").

        Some argue that the whole account is a literary structure, essentially a parable, using normal days to describe something which may have occurred in a different sequence over a different timescale (the "Framework Hypothesis").
        Yes, a lot of people reject the plain teaching of the Bible and try to interpret it so that it doesn't contradict the generally held beliefs.


        No, it is NOT at all clear that these were "literal days". Some of the early church fathers (Origen?) argued that the first three Days could NOT be normal days, since the sun was not created until Day 4.
        What they fail to understand is that the Bible doesn't say that the sun was created on the fourth day. It says that God placed lights in the sky but it doesn't say that the bodies that were the source of those lights were created at that time. The creation account begins with the earth in darkness. On the first day light appears. Previously the earth was covered with clouds that were so thick no light could reach the earth. On the first day these clouds thinned out enough so that light could reach the earth but the sun could not be seen. On the fourth day the cloud cover dissipated so that the sun, moon, and stars could be seen.
        The brutal, soul-shaking truth is that we are so earthly minded we are of no heavenly use.
        Leonard Ravenhill

        https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/

        Comment


        • #5
          I would advise anybody to read Rodney Whitefield on this issue. Also, see here. He makes a good argument IMO.
          -The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
          Sir James Jeans

          -This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
          Sir Isaac Newton

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View Post
            I would advise anybody to read Rodney Whitefield on this issue. Also, see here.
            The first link does not work on my computer. The 2nd link does work.

            In my Deep Time thread, Kbertsche was the first and so far only reader who suggested Whitefield's work.
            The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

            [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

            Comment


            • #7
              Each of God's Days is NOT 24 hours since the word days comes from the Hebrew word Yowm which can mean 12 or 24 hours, a period of time, a lifetime or an Eternity. A Day in Genesis is a period of labor and God has ONLY 6 periods of labor when He is working to make His perfect Heaven and fill it with perfect mankind.

              Today, God continues to create sinners in Christ which means that we live today at Gen 1:27 because God is STILL creating Adam (mankind) in Christ. We will NOT advance to the prophecy of Gen 1:28-31 until AFTER Jesus returns.

              A Yowm is a period of Labor or work when God is doing His work of creating. There is NO time limit or number of days, years, etc. A good example is the Scriptural Fact that TODAY remains the 6th Creative Day and this Day will NOT end until AFTER our Cosmos is burned which is AFTER Jesus rules and reigns on Earth for a thousand years. Revelation 20:5

              The dating of the Ancient Religious Leaders and Archbishop James Ussher does NOT agree with the observed Truth of History. Another good example is the below which shows that the first Human cities were built (some are still with us) by Noah's great grandsons some 10-12k years ago. Gen 10:10.

              http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/map00-fc.html

              God bless

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Seve View Post
                The dating of the Ancient Religious Leaders and Archbishop James Ussher does NOT agree with the observed Truth of History. Another good example is the below which shows that the first Human cities were built (some are still with us) by Noah's great grandsons some 10-12k years ago. Gen 10:10.

                http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/map00-fc.html
                Kerkamash 7500 BC - presumably by Carbon dating.

                Suppose, however, that carbon 14 rate was radically lower, what could that mean in real dates?

                2778 av. J.-Chr.
                40,23593 % + 7550 ans, 10 328 av. J.-Chr.
                2599 av. J.-Chr.
                62,75068 % + 3850 ans, 6449 av. J.-Chr.

                So, since 7500 BC is between 10 328 BC and 6449 BC, the real dates could be between 2778 and 2599 BC.

                See the rest of my table here.
                http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

                Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

                Comment


                • #9
                  The dating of the Ancient Religious Leaders and Archbishop James Ussher does NOT agree with the observed Truth of History.

                  The basis of their dating methodology leaves thousands of years more (if not double) to be added to the estimated numbers of years of the event of the Flood (6K) at the time Noah set foot on this present planet of ours.... AFTER their former world was totally destroyed and dissolved by the flood.

                  Below you will find the empirical evidence for the*SUDDEN*arrival of Human Farmers on this Planet. It happened some 10k + - years ago*EXACTLY*where God told us it did in*Gen 8:4, in the mountains of Ararat. Notice that Big Lake which is between Mt. Ararat and the Center of the Fertile Crescent. Also notice the date when this event happened.*Map: Fertile Crescent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

                  The valleys just SW of these mountains are in Northern Mesopotamia, the Cradle of Human Civilization on this Earth. The*FIRST*Human farming, city building, and*ALL*of the traits of modern Humans began in this area.*

                  Gen 10:10*shows that the great grandsons of Noah*BUILT*these first Human cities, some of which are still standing. The important part is that*HISTORY*agrees, leaving the False assumption of Religionist - the odd man out - since it has*NOT*noticed this event.

                  God bless

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Seve View Post
                    The dating of the Ancient Religious Leaders and Archbishop James Ussher does NOT agree with the observed Truth of History.
                    I would agree about Archlayman Ussher, but that is because he is using the wrong text.

                    Use LXX, you get Flood in 2957 BC. At least on St Jerome's calculation - Byzantines get a somewhat less recent date.

                    [Byzantine and Roman martyrologies have Christ born respectively 5508 and 5199 after Creation, and same amount of years from Creation to Flood, so:

                    5508 2957
                    5199 0309
                    0309 3266

                    A Byzantine, also counting per LXX, would get Flood in 3266 BC]

                    Originally posted by Seve View Post
                    Below you will find the empirical evidence for the*SUDDEN*arrival of Human Farmers on this Planet. It happened some 10k + - years ago*EXACTLY*where God told us it did in*Gen 8:4, in the mountains of Ararat. Notice that Big Lake which is between Mt. Ararat and the Center of the Fertile Crescent. Also notice the date when this event happened.*Map: Fertile Crescent, 9000 to 4500 BCE
                    OK, will quote my table again ...

                    2778 av. J.-Chr.
                    40,23593 % + 7550 ans, 10 328 av. J.-Chr.
                    2599 av. J.-Chr.
                    62,75068 % + 3850 ans, 6449 av. J.-Chr.
                    2420 av. J.-Chr.
                    76,66562 % + 2200 ans, 4620 av. J.-Chr.

                    9000 BC - 4500 BC reduces approximately as 10 328 - 4620 BC. In my view to 2778 - 2420 BC. And the extra years in the carbon dating are not "observed history", but the fact that:

                    2778 BC atmosphere had 40,23593 % of the carbon 14 level observed today, means an extra 7550 years.

                    02778 BC (real date)
                    07550 (extra age)
                    10328 BC (carbon dated)

                    In 2420 BC, carbon 14 level had risen to 76,66562 % in today's atmosphere, means we add only 2200 years.

                    2420 BC (real date)
                    2200 (extra age)
                    4620 BC (carbon dated)
                    http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

                    Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Read Gen 2:4-7 very slowly.... and you will find that Adam, the first Human, was made the 3rd Day, the Same Day the first Earth was made AND the Day/Age when the 2nd and 3rd Heavens/Universes were made. We live today in the 2nd Universe and when this one is burned, ll Peter 3:10 Christians will go to the THIRD Heaven or World, ll Cor 12:2 which also was made on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4

                      Our Heaven/Cosmos was made the 3rd Day and today is STILL the 6th Day/Age because God (the Trinity) is STILL "creating" Adam (mankind) in His Image or in Christ TODAY. We continue to live today at Gen 1:27 and we will NOT advance to the PROPHECY of Gen 1:28-31 until After Jesus returns and changes ALL animals into vegetarians. Gen 1:30 Amen?

                      Six minus 3 equals 3 of God's Days/Ages since the beginning or Big Bang of our Cosmos, which was 13.7 Billion years ago. This means that each of God's Days/Ages is some 4.5 Billion years in man's time.

                      Adam lived with Jesus for some 10 Billion years (as Jesus meet) BEFORE any other creature was created and brought forth from the water here on our present world/planet on the 5th Day, Gen 1:21 which was some 3.7 Billion years ago, in man's time.

                      Science measured our present world to be 4.5b years of age and it agrees with the time frame alluded in the Scripture during the Genesis.


                      God bless

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Seve View Post
                        and today is STILL the 6th Day/Age because God (the Trinity) is STILL "creating" Adam (mankind) in His Image or in Christ TODAY.
                        The key word of what is wrong is the word "still" as if the original creation of man and the sanctification of men, both leading to God's image indeed, were one and the same act, narrated in one and the same words.
                        http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

                        Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Seve View Post
                          Science measured our present world to be 4.5b years of age and it agrees with the time frame alluded in the Scripture during the Genesis.
                          The 4.5 billion years are not something which "science" actually "measured". It is sth which scientists have concluded from certain measurements, but their conclusions can be wrong and in this case are so.
                          http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

                          Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by hansgeorg View Post
                            The key word of what is wrong is the word "still" as if the original creation of man and the sanctification of men, both leading to God's image indeed, were one and the same act, narrated in one and the same words.
                            Dear hansgeorg,

                            Just so you know, NOT everybody is created in the image and likeness of God, unless, one is BORN AGAIN in spirit or in Christ. Jesus Christ, the Son, is the express image of the invisible God. In him (Christ, the Son) is the fulness of Godhead, bodily (physically). If you have seen the Son, you have seen the Father.

                            Most certainly, Cain who was a murderer and a liar from the beginning was NOT an image and likeness of God.

                            The Almighty God Father is a Spirit without physical shape or form and changes not.... therefore, you must worship him in spirit and in truth.

                            1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit v46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

                            God bless

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Seve View Post
                              Most certainly, Cain who was a murderer and a liar from the beginning was NOT an image and likeness of God.
                              With Adam's Sin, we retained the image but lost the likeness. Some regained it, some (like Cain) didn't.

                              But Cain's father and mother were, when created, both image and also likeness of God.
                              http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

                              Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X