Help with the word "Days"

[Happy Hearts Club]

Happy wrote:

Well, I'm glad we agree the similarities show ancestry (common descent). Yes, the genetic evidenced mentioned doesn't say anything about Universal CD, it only supports primate common descent (humans from monkey-like ancestors).

What I haven't heard you agree with is that these items (ervs, chrom 2, and Gulop) all don't fit with the idea of "design similarities". The Ervs are from viral infections, the vestigial telomeres in chrom 2 are not a design feature, and a broken gulop gene clearly isn't a design feature (well, it is a broken one, but not a functional one). Any one of them shows undeniable primate common descent.

And none of them show universal common descent.

To have a real religion, it must not be delusional.

I agree, and I do not take every shred of the Bible as literal.

 

[shernren]

They reproduce according to the fashion in which God created them, "be fruitful and multiply".

Oh, I get it. Animals and plants today reproduce according to the fashion in which God created them.

The fashion in which they reproduce today is that they are generated from sexually reproducing ancestors.

Therefore, God must have created them in a similar fashion too by generating them from sexually reproducing ancestors.

Therefore they must have evolved!

I like it when creationists use the Bible to prove that evolution is true. ^^

 

[Calminian]

Oh, I get it. Animals and plants today reproduce according to the fashion in which God created them.

The fashion in which they reproduce today is that they are generated from sexually reproducing ancestors.

Therefore, God must have created them in a similar fashion too by generating them from sexually reproducing ancestors.

Therefore they must have evolved!

I like it when creationists use the Bible to prove that evolution is true. ^^

This post doesn't even make sense.

 

[Calminian]

There is the NT Greek and OT Hebrew that uses both word "day". For example, 2 Peter 3:8 uses the word "day" referring to the coming of the Lord, and the Genesis account uses the word "day" associated with morning and evening through out all 6 days of creation except the 7 day.

Indeed. Genesis also uses the world day in a different sense in chapter 2.

Gen. 2:4 [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

But it's clear the Gen. 1 days consisted of days and nights and evenings (close of the day) and mornings (close of the night).

Are there reasons to assume that the NT word "day" is more accurate than the OT since it is more modern? If the word "day" in Genesis is 24 hr period, how do we distinguish the difference between what is literal and what is not?[/QUOTE]

Both words mean the same and have, for the most part, the same ranges of meanings. I gave you an example of a different meaning of the O.T. word in Gen. 2:4.

Back in my grandfather's day, he used to walk to and from school each day, but always returning home before the day ended.

3 uses of the word day in one sentence, all with different meanings. Yet it is crystal clear what each word means. Also notice that there is only one possible meaning for each usage. You can't just claim that each usage has 3 possible meanings (like many try to do in the Genesis account).