Literally 6 Days

Post Reply
dwight92070
Posts: 615
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Literally 6 Days

Post by dwight92070 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:23 am

Exodus 20:8-11

"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.

"For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy."

A person either has to be quite dense OR he is pushing his own preconceived agenda to NOT see that the 6 days that a man works and the 1 day that he rests are exactly the same length as the 6 days that God created the heavens and the earth and the 7th day that He rested. If this were not true, then why would God interject His interpretation of the creation week in verse 11, right in the middle of His Ten Commandments?

The Bible interprets itself. The Bible is crystal clear that the creation week was a literal 7 days. The Bible does not leave this question unanswered or uninterpreted. Man can come up with his own interpretation, but he doesn't get it from the Bible. It comes from his own imagination for whatever reason.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by Homer » Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:43 am

Dwight,

The Hebrew word "yom" does not necessarily refer to a period of 24 hours. The first place it is used refers to daytime as opposed to night:

Genesis 1:5 (NASB)

5. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

But in the second sentence above yom appears to refer to a 24 hour period, which is confirmed by:

Genesis 1:8 (NASB)

8. God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.

And then we find:

Genesis 2:2 (NASB)

2. By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

And in this instance we find yom used in reference to God resting (shabath) from His work of creation. Shabath can mean to cease, rest, or come to an end. I believe this verse simply means God ceased His work of creation, not that God ceased from working altogether, as Jesus pointed out:

John 5:16-17 (NASB)

16. For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath. 17. But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”


So for God the Sabbath day rest from creation has lasted for many thousands of years. The Hebrew yom can refer to an indefinite period of time.

User avatar
willowtree
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 1:56 pm
Location: Sooke BC Canada

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by willowtree » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:28 pm

I have heard many times, over the course of my life, from those who were in a position to declare it, say "Let's call it a day. " This was because the workers had come to a point where everyone had been asked to stay later to complete a phase of the work, or it was earlier than the usual quitting time but to start a new phase of work was not a good idea.

While the concept of finishing work at that point has some characteristics of a 'day', the one element that is common to the usual understanding of this call is that the length of time is definitely NOT a day, as defined by time.

When we read that God pointed out that firstly there was a period of night, and this was followed by a period of day, and then he 'called it a day', we can be almost certain that it definitely was not 23 hours and sixty minutes long. In my thinking he quit when he had completed the job he had planned for that day and had checked his work.

And when we consider that it was not until day three that the mechanism was in place to set the timing of a 'day' as we know it, it seems to me to be somewhat artificial to impose that time-length on an earlier day.

I am a believer in a young earth creation model.

My concern is that it can be just as much a stumbling block to our faith to be required to believe things the Bible does not say as it is to not believe things the Bible does say.

Graeme
If you find yourself between a rock and a hard place, always head for the rock. Ps 62..

dwight92070
Posts: 615
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by dwight92070 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:55 pm

So for God the Sabbath day rest from creation has lasted for many thousands of years. The Hebrew yom can refer to an indefinite period of time.[/quote]

Dwight speaking: Again, the Bible is very clear that He rested on the sabbath day, not beyond that. Also He rested FROM HIS WORK of creation, not from everything else. So if "yom" refers to an indefinite period of time, then God commanded man to work for 6 indefinite periods of time before he was allowed to rest for 1 indefinite period of time. How silly.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by Homer » Fri Mar 10, 2017 12:28 am

Hi Dwight,

You wrote:
Dwight speaking: Again, the Bible is very clear that He rested on the sabbath day, not beyond that. Also He rested FROM HIS WORK of creation, not from everything else.
I'm not sure for what you are saying here. In your first sentence are you saying God did absolutely nothing on the Sabbath and went to work again the next day? I agree with your second sentence. He never stopped working totally, else things would have fallen apart:

Colossians 1:17 (NASB)

17. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

So if "yom" refers to an indefinite period of time, then God commanded man to work for 6 indefinite periods of time before he was allowed to rest for 1 indefinite period of time. How silly.
Well, if you check the theological dictionaries you will see that yom has a range of meaning much wider than a 24 hour day. I think God commanded six days of work as a day of rest for the benefit of man and that it was a memorial of what God had done in creation. Is it silly to consume a piece of bread and a sip of the fruit of the vine as a memorial of Jesus' death on the cross? The memorial ceremony and Christ's crucifixion are dissimilar yet one memorializes the actual event.

I'm with Graeme, Although I lean to the young earth side I am not dogmatic about it.

Be blessed!

dwight92070
Posts: 615
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by dwight92070 » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:14 am

I'm not sure for what you are saying here. In your first sentence are you saying God did absolutely nothing on the Sabbath and went to work again the next day?

Dwight speaking: Whether He did something else on the Sabbath besides resting from His creation, we are not told.

So if "yom" refers to an indefinite period of time, then God commanded man to work for 6 indefinite periods of time before he was allowed to rest for 1 indefinite period of time. How silly.
Well, if you check the theological dictionaries you will see that yom has a range of meaning much wider than a 24 hour day. I think God commanded six days of work as a day of rest for the benefit of man and that it was a memorial of what God had done in creation. Is it silly to consume a piece of bread and a sip of the fruit of the vine as a memorial of Jesus' death on the cross? The memorial ceremony and Christ's crucifixion are dissimilar yet one memorializes the actual event.

Dwight speaking: Of course communion is not silly. Jesus Himself instituted it. But it would be silly, if there were no literal sacrifice of His body and shedding of His blood to symbolize. The same is true with the word "day". The word "day" could never be used symbolically unless it first had a literal meaning. Genesis clearly defines it's literal meaning for us at least 7 times: "And there was evening and there was morning, one day." Some may ask, but what does "evening" mean, or what does "morning" mean? Clearly, they mean exactly what they mean to us now. God was doing this for our benefit and our understanding. The sabbath was made for man, not the other way around. Could we not say that the other 6 days were made for man too? There is no great mystery here. Just as the evening and the morning today is a 24 hour period, so it was then. As far as there being no sun until the 4th day, so what? God created light on the 1st day and He acknowledged that there was darkness on that 1st day as well. This was no problem for God, why should it be for us? I believe God wanted us to understand what happened when He created everything. That's why we have the written account. It's not one difficult jigsaw puzzle that God hopes we'll never solve.

I'm with Graeme, Although I lean to the young earth side I am not dogmatic about it.

Be blessed![/quote]

User avatar
TK
Posts: 1475
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by TK » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:03 am

Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work,
I guess if we want to get super literal about it, man should work 24 hrs a day for 6 days and rest all day on the Sabbath. It does not say "For part of 6 days you shall labor and do your work.." Why do we imply only a portion of the 6 days for working and the whole day for the Sabbath?

The literalness of the days in Gen 1 is certainly debatable and possibly even a poetic device (which is kind of what I believe, as I tend toward Old Earth creationism).

One thing I do know- if day 6 was an actual 24-hour day it was a whopper. I just can't see all the events depicted to have occurred on day 6 (per Gen 1 & 2) as happening in a literal 24 hr day. But that's just me of course!

Singalphile
Posts: 892
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by Singalphile » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:47 pm

Even if I knew nothing about the Bible or the history of the Earth, if I read the first few chapters of Genesis, I think I would be inclined to read it as a mythology, i.e., a story told to explain nature, history and customs, as wikipedia puts it. That just seems to me like the genre.

The fact that the author and writing is truly God-breathed/inspired need not change that assessment. God is allowed to use mythology to get His commands or points across, isn't He? And it would be natural to quote the story in order to make the point that the story is trying to make. I do the same, even though I have my doubts that Adam and Eve's first disobedient act was to eat a piece of fruit.

So it seems to me like the account has a theological purposes, to explain the will and nature of God (as dictionary.com puts it) in a way that we and the ancients could remember and enjoy. Without any of that, the details seem arbitrary and somewhat pointless. Seven days? Who cares? Could just as well have been five days, right? Or why not just do it all in a nanosecond?

It's possible that the account was meant to be both literal and theological. Fine, but I don't understand why it should be assumed or necessary.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

dwight92070
Posts: 615
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by dwight92070 » Fri Mar 10, 2017 9:59 pm

Singalphile wrote:Even if I knew nothing about the Bible or the history of the Earth, if I read the first few chapters of Genesis, I think I would be inclined to read it as a mythology, i.e., a story told to explain nature, history and customs, as wikipedia puts it. That just seems to me like the genre.

The fact that the author and writing is truly God-breathed/inspired need not change that assessment. God is allowed to use mythology to get His commands or points across, isn't He?

Dwight speaking: Luke did not believe it was a myth - Luke 3:38. The apostle Paul did not believe it was a myth - Romans 5:14; 1 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Corinthians 15:22 and 15:45; 1 Timothy 2:13-14. The writer of Hebrews did not believe it was a myth - Hebrews 11:4 and 12:24. The apostle John did not believe it was a myth - 1 John 3:12. Jude did not believe it was a myth - Jude 1:11 and 14 Jesus Himself did not believe it was a myth - Matthew 19:4-5; Luke 11:51.

I do the same, even though I have my doubts ... (Dwight speaking) None of the 6 men just mentioned doubted the account, nor did Jesus Himself.

Without any of that, the details seem arbitrary and somewhat pointless. Seven days? Who cares? Could just as well have been five days, right? Or why not just do it all in a nanosecond?

Dwight speaking: Obviously, God cares, or He would not have provided us with the details and because He cares, we should too.

It's possible that the account was meant to be both literal and theological. Fine, but I don't understand why it should be assumed or necessary.
Dwight speaking: Because that is the way Jesus and the 6 other godly men took it. Why would you be unwilling to do the same?

Singalphile
Posts: 892
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Literally 6 Days

Post by Singalphile » Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:52 pm

dwight92070 wrote:
Singalphile wrote:Even if I knew nothing about the Bible or the history of the Earth, if I read the first few chapters of Genesis, I think I would be inclined to read it as a mythology, i.e., a story told to explain nature, history and customs, as wikipedia puts it. That just seems to me like the genre.

The fact that the author and writing is truly God-breathed/inspired need not change that assessment. God is allowed to use mythology to get His commands or points across, isn't He?

Dwight speaking: Luke did not believe it was a myth - Luke 3:38. The apostle Paul did not believe it was a myth - Romans 5:14; 1 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Corinthians 15:22 and 15:45; 1 Timothy 2:13-14. The writer of Hebrews did not believe it was a myth - Hebrews 11:4 and 12:24. The apostle John did not believe it was a myth - 1 John 3:12. Jude did not believe it was a myth - Jude 1:11 and 14 Jesus Himself did not believe it was a myth - Matthew 19:4-5; Luke 11:51.

I do the same, even though I have my doubts ... (Dwight speaking) None of the 6 men just mentioned doubted the account, nor did Jesus Himself.

Without any of that, the details seem arbitrary and somewhat pointless. Seven days? Who cares? Could just as well have been five days, right? Or why not just do it all in a nanosecond?

Dwight speaking: Obviously, God cares, or He would not have provided us with the details and because He cares, we should too.

It's possible that the account was meant to be both literal and theological. Fine, but I don't understand why it should be assumed or necessary.
Dwight speaking: Because that is the way Jesus and the 6 other godly men took it. Why would you be unwilling to do the same?
Thanks for the response and these references.
Luke 3:38 - " ...the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."

Romans 5:14 - "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come."
1 Cor 11:3 - "But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ."
1 Cor 15:22 - "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive."
1 Cor 15:45 - "So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit."
1 Tim 2:13-14 - "For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."

Heb 11:4 - "By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain ...."
Heb 12:24 - "... and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel."

1 John 3:12 - "... not as Cain, who was of the evil one and slew his brother. And for what reason did he slay him? Because his deeds were evil, and his brother’s were righteous."

Jude 1:11 - "Woe to them! For they have gone the way of Cain, and for pay they have rushed headlong into the error of Balaam, and perished in the rebellion of Korah."
Jude 1:14 - "It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying ...."

Matt 19:4-5 - "And He answered ... “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and ... ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother ...?"
Luke 11:51 - "from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of God ...."
I haven't said anything about Abel or Cain or Korah, etc. I referred only to the "first few chapters of Genesis", but especially our chapter 1, per the thread.

Regarding Adam and Eve, I have always thought there was a first man and woman - "the man" and "the woman", or Adam and Eve - created in God's image, our ancestors, tempted by a deceiver, resulting in their disobedience to God and our current state. I never said otherwise. I don't know if all the Biblical authors had the same opinion. A reference to Adam and Eve doesn't prove or disprove anything that I wrote, as far as I can tell. (Paul's non-literal use of "Adam" in 1 Cor 15:45 is interesting, though I don't make anything out of it, beyond the context.)

You intimated that you're not dogmatic about this topic. Neither am I. I hope you could tell from my post that my opinion is lightly held. The theological meaning of Gen 1-3 is most important, I think, and I bet we're in near 100% agreement about that.

Where we disagree, I'm willing to share your opinion, if I'm convinced. I still wonder if you would allow that God could communicate with us using the genre of mythology, and I still wonder why there are 7 days of creation rather than, say, 8, and why it should matter to me, just as a matter of history in your more strongly held view, that it was 7 instead of 8.

Thank you!
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”