Define literal vs non-literal.

ICR writes:
When ordinals or the phrase "evening and morning" are connected with yom, it always means a solar day. The context of the six days of creation account in Genesis 1 precludes any meaning of indefinite time. I guess you ignored their points. Not one of those examples follows what I, or that ICR has stated. You're creating strawmen. Dan states the plural, not singular. Hos is an idiom and Zech doesnt even use evening and morning.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know YOM is Hebrew. It means "day". I'm not sure what you are trying to imply here.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I explained this already, but I'm assuming you missed it. I was using ONE English translation. In that translation, every time a number was before YOM, it refered to a 24 hour day. You pointed out a number follows YOM, does not precede it, IN MOST CASES. So I did what you mentioned. The result is the exact same. When a number is used with YOM, it ALWAYS refers to a 24 hour period. Regardless if its precedes it or comes after it.I also have brought this up a few times. If science tomorrow states the earth was created in 6 days, you and Peg would jump all over it. You'd abandon your stance that it refers to billions of years in a second. If I mentioned 200 years ago that it refers to billions of years, you'd argue tooth and nail it does not, that the Bible is quite clear. Christians argue that it means billions of years bc the evidence is too overwhelming. It has nothing to do with the actual scripture. The context of the story states its 24 hours, per day.Evening and morning, day one. How much more clear can one get? Exodus, states 6 days.There are words for long periods of time, not once were they used.You want to believe god is not the author of confusion. So when one reads Exodus, does it mean 24 hours, a week, a month, a year, a thousand years, a few thousands, a million, a billion? Gets confusing doesn't it?Not if it means a week. There isnt any indication the author of Genesis and Exodus meant anything other than a 24 hour period. Nothing.There isnt any evidence in scripture to support that belief. None.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But the crux of my entire argument is that when evening AND mornig are used, its always a 24 hour day. Nowhere does this verse state "morning". I am comparing what Genesis states (evening and morning) to where that terminology is used elsewhere in scripture.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is ANOTHER strawman. You quote me, in which I state when "evening and morning" are used it always means a 24 hour period. Then you change it as if I said "evening, morning and day" are used together. You then uses scripture thats states "eveningS and morningS". Of course its plural and means long periods of time! Sheesh!There are many verses where "evening and morning" are used, ALL refer to a 24 hour period. Here are a few examples, in order:Exodus 16:8
Moses also said, "You will know that it was the LORD when he gives you meat to eat in the evening and all the bread you want in the morning, because he has heard your grumbling against him. Who are we? You are not grumbling against us, but against the LORD."
Exodus 16:7-9 (in Context) Exodus 16 (Whole Chapter)
Exodus 16:13
That evening quail came and covered the camp, and in the morning there was a layer of dew around the camp.
Exodus 16:12-14 (in Context) Exodus 16 (Whole Chapter)
Exodus 18:13
The next day Moses took his seat to serve as judge for the people, and they stood around him from morning till evening.
Exodus 18:12-14 (in Context) Exodus 18 (Whole Chapter)
Exodus 18:14
When his father-in-law saw all that Moses was doing for the people, he said, "What is this you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge, while all these people stand around you from morning till evening?"
Exodus 18:13-15 (in Context) Exodus 18 (Whole Chapter)
Exodus 27:21
In the Tent of Meeting, outside the curtain that is in front of the Testimony, Aaron and his sons are to keep the lamps burning before the LORD from evening till morning. This is to be a lasting ordinance among the Israelites for the generations to come.
Exodus 27:20-21 (in Context) Exodus 27 (Whole Chapter)There are many, many more. Each refers to a 24 hour period.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zech 14:7 does not refer to a long period of time. Second, it does not contain "evening or morning". You're making a strawman here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm not sure if I'm not explaing myself correctly (possible) or you're just not understanding.It matters not if it contains "evening". I said when "evening and morning' are used. Yes, it does say "one day", but it refers to a day in the future.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About time you got to this one! But you're misunderstanding it. Its an idiom alright, but the the days represents a 24 hour period for each. If "day" meant a long period of time, it would contradict the prophecy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ok...you lost me. I have the stance that the day in Genesis refers to a 24 hour day. You're stance, is that its not a 24 hour day. Unless I have mixed up your argument and Pegs (who states its a million or billion), I thought your stance regarding the "day" in Genesis is also the same. Our entire debate so far, as far as I can tell, is based upon the Genesis account of what a "day" is.I have stated that anytime a day is used with "evening" or "morning" it refers to 24 hours. You pointed out the above scripture shows that I was incorrect. I'm not. Its an idiom, still refering to a 24 hour day.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other words, a comparison is being made between how long gods anger was to be/restorie Israel and a "day". The prophecy collapses if if "day" meant anything other than a 24 hour day.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- They're agreeing with me! Its an idiom! In other words, yes, its figurative, BUT its comparing the short amount of time of the prophecy to a solar day. If the days in question were long periods of time, it would contradict the scripture.Here, from the information you gave:NET translator's note writes:tn Heb after two days (so KJV, NIV, NRSV). The expression after two days is an idiom meaning after a short time (see, e.g., Judg 11:4; BDB 399 s.v. MOwy 5.a).tn Heb on the third day (so NASB, NIV, NRSV), which parallels after two days and means in a little while. The 2—3 sequence is an example of graded numerical parallelism (Prov 30:15—16, 18—19, 21—23, 24—28, 29—31). This expresses the unrepentant overconfidence of Israel that the LORD’s discipline of Israel would be relatively short and that he would restore them quickly.Notice numerical parallelsim? Its comparing a solar day to the prophecy.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS 18:2 The LORD is my rock... This is an idiom. God is not really a "rock', but unless you're using the terminlogy of what a rock really is, the verse makes no sense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're not understanding what an idiom is.3 days, prophecy. The prophecy is not a 3 day prophecy, so its not literally 3 days. BUT.....you have to understand, its comparing the prophecy to 3 solar days. By understanding that its an idiom, it shows that the prophecy is to be a short amount of time.The lord is my rock. Lord compared to a rock. The lord is not actually a stone, but by understanding what a stone is, it explains what the lord is.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottom line, "day" still means 24 hours.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am not commited to any rule. In fact, PD has explained in detail to Peg regarding the Hebrew. I simply pointed out, using context, Genesis refers to 24 hours. I also pointed out, by example that anytime "evening" and "morning" are used in scripture it refers to 24 hours. I also pointed out anytime "day" is used with a number, it refers to 24 hours. I also pointed out there are words for long periods of time, none are used in Genesis or Exodus regarding the creation. You have yet to give a single example that contradicts this. Yes, you can find sites that show the Hebrew COULD have meant long periods of time, just as I have sites that show it could NOT have meant long periods of time. We can go back and forth on this topic. But just bc it "can" mean a long period of time, does not mean it should be read that way. Hence why I focused more on the context of how the words is used.After all this debate, my points stand.

ote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is ANOTHER strawman. You quote me, in which I state when "evening and morning" are used it always means a 24 hour period. Then you change it as if I said "evening, morning and day" are used together. You then uses scripture thats states "eveningS and morningS". Of course its plural and means long periods of time! Sheesh!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ok, gotcha. My bad at first. I tend to rush my posts due to limited time and I make quite a few mistakes. So my apologies for the initial confusion.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I explained this already, but I'm assuming you missed it. I was using ONE English translation. In that translation, every time a number was before YOM, it refered to a 24 hour day. You pointed out a number follows YOM, does not precede it, IN MOST CASES. So I did what you mentioned. The result is the exact same. When a number is used with YOM, it ALWAYS refers to a 24 hour period. Regardless if its precedes it or comes after it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But "day" is "yom". Ok, gotcha.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also have brought this up a few times. If science tomorrow states the earth was created in 6 days, you and Peg would jump all over it. You'd abandon your stance that it refers to billions of years in a second. If I mentioned 200 years ago that it refers to billions of years, you'd argue tooth and nail it does not, that the Bible is quite clear. Christians argue that it means billions of years bc the evidence is too overwhelming. It has nothing to do with the actual scripture. The context of the story states its 24 hours, per day.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have not read all of PD's responses, but isn't her stance that the authors were using solar days in respect to a actual days? So what exactly is your opinion then? Does the author refers to a 24 hour day or longer? If its longer, arent we then having the same debate? If yes, then I still believe the only reason you're taking a stance against a literal day is due to what science has brought to the table.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There isnt any indication the author of Genesis and Exodus meant anything other than a 24 hour period. Nothing.
There isnt any evidence in scripture to support that belief. None.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I could easily take the stance that there are many scholars who say otherwise. I bet most of your scholars come from the 20th century though. I wonder why that is? Again, there isnt any defintive evidence if its a long period of time or an actual 24 hour day based upon the wording. But again, why not use a word that implies long periods of time if that is what is meant? Why use the terminology, which completely gives the impression of a solar day, evening and morning, day one?Out of curiosity, can you show me a few scholars, who are not Christians, who state that without a doubt, its not literal days?Since you obviously have more information at your disposal (I have a few sites) I decided to dig around. I found this:
The following is an extract from a letter written in 1984 by Professor James Barr, who was at the time Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford. Please note that Professor Barr does not claim to believe that Genesis is literally true, he is just telling us, openly and honestly, what the language means.Professor Barr said,Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Gen. 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience There are many theologians (as opposed to Hebrew language experts) who insist on long days, for example................................There are many theologians (as opposed to Hebrew language experts) who insist on long days, for example.Six Days? - Honestly! - ChristianAnswers.NetEdited by hERICtic, : No reason given.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure if I'm not explaing myself correctly (possible) or you're just not understanding.
It matters not if it contains "evening". I said when "evening and morning' are used. Yes, it does say "one day", but it refers to a day in the future.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I really have no idea what you are refering to. I already stated, using Hebrew (which I used after you stated I should not use an English version)
states the exact same thing.If you have evidence to the contrary, please show me.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I never said that "day" meant "a long period of time." (I suspect you're following some sort of crib sheet for YECs to argue against the Day-Age view.) Day is figurative/metaphorical here, as part of an idiom.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ok...you lost me. I have the stance that the day in Genesis refers to a 24 hour day. You're stance, is that its not a 24 hour day. Unless I have mixed up your argument and Pegs (who states its a million or billion), I thought your stance regarding the "day" in Genesis is also the same. Our entire debate so far, as far as I can tell, is based upon the Genesis account of what a "day" is.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then I'm not mixing up anything. I am debating you on the lenght of those days. You're saying its not definitive, I'm taking the side that they are.Based upon the evidence you've thrown out, you have offered nothing to support your assertions.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. The days are figurative here. Do you really know Hebrew better than all of the (conservative) translators and commentators that I listed?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------They're agreeing with me! Its an idiom! In other words, yes, its figurative, BUT its comparing the short amount of time of the prophecy to a solar day. If the days in question were long periods of time, it would contradict the scripture.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Uh oh, I think violence is prohibited here. quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 days, prophecy. The prophecy is not a 3 day prophecy, so its not literally 3 days. BUT.....you have to understand, its comparing the prophecy to 3 solar days. By understanding that its an idiom, it shows that the prophecy is to be a short amount of time.
The lord is my rock. Lord compared to a rock. The lord is not actually a stone, but by understanding what a stone is, it explains what the lord is.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But its not an idiom in Genesis. Thats the point. I believe the textual implication is quite clear. A normal solar day. I use 24 hours, bc thats what a day is. Maybe it was slightly different 6 thousand years ago, but we are still refering to a solar day.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are many, many conservative Evangelical Hebrew and Old Testament scholars who say otherwise. I guess you know better than all of them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------I could easily take the stance that there are many scholars who say otherwise. I bet most of your scholars come from the 20th century though. I wonder why that is? Again, there isnt any defintive evidence if its a long period of time or an actual 24 hour day based upon the wording. But again, why not use a word that implies long periods of time if that is what is meant? Why use the terminology, which completely gives the impression of a solar day, evening and morning, day one?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There isnt any indication the author of Genesis and Exodus meant anything other than a 24 hour period. Nothing.
There isnt any evidence in scripture to support that belief. None.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Its dogmatic only in the sense that its correct. I didnt suggest that EVERY person before the 20th century believed in a literal Genesis. But the majority most certainly did. Its only through modern times that Genesis now seems to indicate a non-literal interpretation. Why? The evidence is too vast to argue against science.Why did Augustine think otherwise?quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Out of curiosity, can you show me a few scholars, who are not Christians, who state that without a doubt, its not literal days?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Professor Nahum Sarna, who was chairman of the Department of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies at Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts, referred to the days in Genesis as the same kind of days in the regulatory sacrifices in the Book of Leviticus (i.e. literal days, Lev. 7:15; 22:30).13 Creation Days and Orthodox Jewish Tradition | Answers in Genesis

You have me at a loss. This is the intial post of this thread: So I feel that I am right on topic when discussing if Genesis 1 refers to solar days or long periods of time. One checks for internal information, grammer, language, translation, the mind of the author, the context and so forth. I believe I covered all the areas. I have yet to see you offer any information that its anything but 24 hours. You also have debated Paul and Hydroglyphx in the same respect regarding its its literal or not. Also, I was told to go to this thread and debate my viewpoint on this topic (since it was brought up elsewhere and not really in context of that thread) by PurpleDawn. I do not see how I am not grasping your points though, when in fact, you started to debate me, as Peg and I were discussing the length of the days in Genesis, literal or not. You were the one who addressed my points initially. I have read all the posts here and many clearly are in context as to what you and I are talking about. If you're looking as to "why" the author wrote what he did and from that come to a conclusion as to how he wished Genesis 1 to be revealed, ok.I have a hard time accepting that the author wrote down everything was perfect, knowing full well at the beginning of creation for millions of years, death and destruction was upon the animal kingdom. But again, I may be off topic bc I am certainly not understanding what you are trying to convey regarding why my viewpoint is off topics concerning this thread. I have read PurpleDawns posts (which I love reading) against Pegs "epoch" point of view, which seem to take the same stance I do, that its not long periods of time. The thread is called "Literal vs Non-Literal", so I would assume my stance on it being a literal day would be on topic, with evidence provided. With the other viewpoint, that its not to be taken literally and why, to be the counter point.You seem to feel I am dogmatic, when in fact, the evidence is overwhelming. Is adhering to the evidence when little of no counter evidence to the contrary considered dogmatic? I have seen nothing to indicate by anyone that its anyting but a solar day. PD clearly showed the Hebrew grammer points to a solar day. I have provided the context and internal evidence using scripture to show it can only refer to a solar day. you brought up that theologians take it as long periods of time, which I then brought up Old Testament or Hebrew scholars take it as literal. Yet you accuse me of using biased sites? You also accuse me of being a YEC, when in fact, I'm an atheist.That all being said, I'll stand down. For the simple fact, I love reading what PD has to say, among other people on this topic and other topics. I only joined this thread to debate Peg-which has offered no evidence whatsover to support her view. I also realize why she has taken that stance. That being said, I'll still be around, but as a viewer.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You also accuse me of being a YEC, when in fact, I'm an atheist.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Which I have. Just to clear up a point. I have also used OEC, which I have stated. Of the many I frequented, none were able to dispute the many points I brought up with evidence. Some were off the wall trying to twist the Hebrew to make it says the plural, to make it fit long periods of time. I also have stated most Hebrew and OT scholars back my assertions. I use YEC sites, bc its the most easiest to gather information from. But I do use other sources to check how honest they are. Trust me, from debating many years, I would not call ANY apologist site non-biased or honest.Take care. Well, at least for now.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
in this verse the righteous persons way of life is slowly revealed until the 'day' (the light) is firmly established...IOW, when the light of day reveals his works.
So it is in the figuative 'morning' of Geneis when the results of Gods creation comes into focus and are clearly seen.As an example, on the 3rd creative day God caused the dry land to appear. Now the creation of land requires volcanic activity, so we can imagine that millions of large volcanos were active during this period and were spewing out large amounts of lava beneath the waters until they began to form the landmasses. This isnt an overnight process as we know. It takes a long time for an island to form, so during this time was the 'evening' because the process was incomplete, but when it was complete it became the 'morning' or a period of light when all was clearly discernable.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just to correct a point. Genesis clearly states the earth was covered by water first, then dry land appeared. Its the other way around. It was the volcanos, on dry land, which spewed forth gasses which created water vapor.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just to correct a point. Genesis clearly states the earth was covered by water first, then dry land appeared. Its the other way around. It was the volcanos, on dry land, which spewed forth gasses which created water vapor.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm not telling you this, but Peg. Its her quote (my apologies for not including her name though). But yes, it does matter, since Peg brought it up to add validity to her stance. Shes trying to make Genesis 1:9 fit modern science, to prove YOM is actually a long period of time. The problem though, her premise is faulty, therefore her conclusion based upon that premise is. Edited by hERICtic, : No reason given.