Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Why not? It is certainly possible to accept the Bible as divinely inspired and still not believe that the world was literally created in seven days six thousand years ago.
None of what you quoted says the days were 24 hours by a modern stopwatch.
None of what you quoted actually says the first three days before the sun was made were 24 hours by a modern stopwatch.
Reading the text simply by itself, with no references to science or skepticism, the text simply says that the light was called day and that on the fourth of the exchanges of night and day, the sun was made to measure the length of the days, in Gen 1. No further specification of the exact length of the first 3 or 4 days when there was no measuring object is ever given, except for tangential statements like a day for God is like 1000 years for man, in the Psalms.
It is hard to prove to a person with an opposite, strongly held view on this topic. The best I think we can do is try to look at the issues as objectively as possible, open to conclusions that go against our preferences.
Take for example the question of whether everything in the Bible is factually incorrect when intended to be factually correct. Many Christians are divided on the question, since the Bible does not specifically claim that the Bible or anything inspired by God cannot include mistakes of fact.)
It would be like a Christian minister being inspired by the Spirit in him to say that God's way is as straight and pure as route 54, but unknown to the minister, route 54 is actually mostly quite curvy and in need of intense repair, just not at the part he has ever seen.
There are stories like Noah's ark and the Great Flood, and verses like those on the flat earth, that sound so fantastic that either: (A) Reality was warped in that time period just 5000 years ago or so, or (B) these are allegories, or (C) they are factually incorrect myths like parables with spiritual value.
If you pick (A), what you have picked does not normally sound realistic . It sounds abnormal to teach that the earth is flat, or that it was flat in 600 BC or so and afterwards straightened itself out. Nowadays the ideas of a spherical earth is proved so strongly that there is pretty unanimous agreement, with only a few hold outs.
Teaching that the pairs of every animal species in the world just walked onto Noah's ark across all the continents does not sound realistic, just like it does not sound realistic that after leaving the ark, flightless birds came to New Zealand and then lost their flying ability in a few thousand years alone. How did they feed themselves on the ark? Did it simply rain and spring up from the earth in such droves that it flooded the world? Did you know that the ark would not float based on Physical principles of torque and this is why no ship has been built of wood that big? The stories sound so much like fantasy, myth, or warped reality, that it's hard to make it sound realistic.
Architects have built many small wooden models of the ark and even some life sized ones, they've never succeeded in making one that floats on its own . In fact, they've had to float the big models on barges because they are actually unseaworthy.
It's true that failure to build a successful life sized wood model does not disprove that it's possible. It's just a piece of evidence towards it being unrealistic.
I am fine with being proven wrong and seeing a Ark of wood floated long distance at sea. It seems to me though that the architectural issues and failures show that it's probably not realistic. This is just one of many issues. I am not aware of any known animals being seen as having lost flight ability in a few thousand years, nor does it appear realistic to think (as some proposed) that Australia went into a corner of the globe in a few thousand years, or far less than that time. That is why I say it demands a warped view of reality compared to how we currently understand the laws of nature to work. Or there were extreme supernatural actions involved, like marching the lions, giraffes, siberian tigers, etc. etc. onto the Ark.
If you pick (B), viewing the verses as metaphorical, allegorical, or figurative, the problem is that the verses appear as if they are meant factually. In fact, I can lay out a list of questions in a Socratic style to show as a matter of literary analysis, one would normally interpret them to be intended as factual.
Take for example Psalm 104:5 "Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken."
What are the earth's foundations and how do they stop it from "shaking" always ? Do earthquakes count and can a comet hit the earth to shake it from its orbit? Or take for example the story of Noah's flood. It's quite a lengthy account and it nowhere says that it's a parable.
If comets don't count, then I suppose one could propose that by "not shaken" the verse just means its normal orbit when there are no comets? If so, how do the things that keep the earth stable also keep it on its orbit?
If you pick (C) and say that they are factually mistaken myths or parables, on the basis that the Bible never says that they are parables, while instead they are simply presented in a straightforward manner as if they were facts. The problem however is that in deciding that the Biblical stories in the Old Testament are fantasy, fictional miracles and made up supernatural ideas, then it means that the Bible contains fiction that is mistakenly portrayed as fact. And this in turn opens up the possibility that the stories of Jesus' extreme miracles are also made up fiction, and that we are not required to think that they are facts just by virtue of them being in the Bible. I think that many people do not want to pick C because they feel more emotionally comfortable asserting that the entire Bible is not only spiritually true, but that it is factually true also.
