How can creation week be literal 24 hour days?

[BobRyan]

Exodus 20
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the 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. 11 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.

vs 11 is a direct reference to Genesis 2:1-3 ... same author, same subject, same event.

Genesis 2:1-3
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 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. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Yes, God had completed commanding the creation processes but still there is no time frame other than 6 days with resting on the seventh. The numerical corresponding to a day has to do with God's command/fiat, .

The statement God makes - is to show that the units are the same and that the week is the same ... and argues that the Hebrews were to follow that same pattern INSTEAD of saying "scatter 6 days all across any given year... then add a 7th day at any point during the year"

Inserting such ideas is a bend and stretch of Ex 20:8-11 that is abuse of the text beyond all reason. God Himself sets the iron clad equivalence in those verses 8-11 with Genesis 1:2-2:3

 

[BobRyan]

It appears that all the arguments against a literal 7 day week in Genesis 1:2-2:3 do not survive God's own summary comment on that event in Exodus 20:8-11 where it is He who sets iron-clad exact equivalence for the week at Sinai and the week of Genesis 1:2-2:3.

I have yet to see a serious challenge to this inconvenient 'detail'

rather what we get are arguments about why God should not have done that and then going back to Genesis 1 to dig up some inferences to argue that the statement made in Ex 20:8-11 must be totally wrong.. and God should not have said that their week in Exodus 20 was really the same as Genesis 1.

 

[The Barbarian]

As for Genesis 1:2-2:4 your statement is Not true according To God Himself speaking and writing in Exodus 20:8-11

Sorry, He doesn't say they are calendar days there, either.

 

[The Barbarian]

CREATION WAS NOT A PARABLE BUT AN ACCOUNT OF WHAT HAPPENED AS IT HAPPENED.

I know you want to believe it, but as you have seen, it's not a literal history. Instead of getting bogged down in trying to make it so, why not learn what the actual message is for you?

 

[Kaon]

Exodus 20
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the 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. 11 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.

vs 11 is a direct reference to Genesis 2:1-3 ... same author, same subject, same event.

Genesis 2:1-3
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 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. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

True.. I did say that.

And I also pointed out that in Exodus 16 they were given the "6 days of manna and nada on the 7th day Sabbath" exercise to the point that there was no confusion at all on that detail by the time they get to God speaking out loud in Exodus 20.





Which is of course - interesting speculation. But Moses is writing to the same folks of Exodus 20 -- in Genesis 1-2. All one author, all the same audience and Exodus 20:11 DOES go back to the very detail you claim is untrue - to make the case for a literal 7 day week in Genesis as being exactly what they have in Exodus 20.

Irrefutable.


​

And it is because in Exodus 20:8-11 God is telling them it is the same unit of time that they have staring them in the face.

details .. particularly that one ... matter.



Evening and morning "the first day" only require two things.

1. A rotating planet (and you "appear" to argue that planet rotated at a different rate then... which is a candidate for nonsense).

2. A light source on only one side of the planet.

God's statement in Ex 20:11 is essentially that the planet's rotation at the time of Exodus 20 -- is pretty much what it was in Genesis 1.




A literal day is one rotation of the planet.

Genesis 1 does not say "sunset to sunset" but rather "evening and morning" -- and thus the "source" of the light does not have to be the sun in the first 3 days.



It does not matter because to get to "one day" all you need is a rotating planet and a light source on one side of Earth



Planets rotate.

Even rogue planets out in deep space are expected to conserve angular momentum. Galaxies also rotate.

You don't interpolate human logic into something that has a very clear answer. God is not the author of confusion.

God told them in Exodus 8:8-11 that the unit of time was the same -- and it is no surprise that the Earth's rotation had not changed in that 3000 year period of time.






That is not the minimum conditions needed to get a 24 hour day.. .the way we get it is one rotation of the planet and all we need to "watch it" is a light source on one side of the Earth.


Could not be any more obvious -- as I think you may agree.

What is more God Himself is telling them in their own language that the units of time were the same in Exodus 20:8-11.

Impossible to miss.

 

[Kaon]

Exodus 20
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the 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. 11 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.

vs 11 is a direct reference to Genesis 2:1-3 ... same author, same subject, same event.

Genesis 2:1-3
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 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. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

True.. I did say that.

And I also pointed out that in Exodus 16 they were given the "6 days of manna and nada on the 7th day Sabbath" exercise to the point that there was no confusion at all on that detail by the time they get to God speaking out loud in Exodus 20.





Which is of course - interesting speculation. But Moses is writing to the same folks of Exodus 20 -- in Genesis 1-2. All one author, all the same audience and Exodus 20:11 DOES go back to the very detail you claim is untrue - to make the case for a literal 7 day week in Genesis as being exactly what they have in Exodus 20.

Irrefutable.


​

And it is because in Exodus 20:8-11 God is telling them it is the same unit of time that they have staring them in the face.

details .. particularly that one ... matter.



Evening and morning "the first day" only require two things.

1. A rotating planet (and you "appear" to argue that planet rotated at a different rate then... which is a candidate for nonsense).

2. A light source on only one side of the planet.

God's statement in Ex 20:11 is essentially that the planet's rotation at the time of Exodus 20 -- is pretty much what it was in Genesis 1.




A literal day is one rotation of the planet.

Genesis 1 does not say "sunset to sunset" but rather "evening and morning" -- and thus the "source" of the light does not have to be the sun in the first 3 days.



It does not matter because to get to "one day" all you need is a rotating planet and a light source on one side of Earth



Planets rotate.

Even rogue planets out in deep space are expected to conserve angular momentum. Galaxies also rotate.

You don't interpolate human logic into something that has a very clear answer. God is not the author of confusion.

God told them in Exodus 8:8-11 that the unit of time was the same -- and it is no surprise that the Earth's rotation had not changed in that 3000 year period of time.






That is not the minimum conditions needed to get a 24 hour day.. .the way we get it is one rotation of the planet and all we need to "watch it" is a light source on one side of the Earth.


Could not be any more obvious -- as I think you may agree.

What is more God Himself is telling them in their own language that the units of time were the same in Exodus 20:8-11.

Impossible to miss.

I hope you find what you are looking for.

 

[BobRyan]

It appears that all the arguments against a literal 7 day week in Genesis 1:2-2:3 do not survive God's own summary comment on that event in Exodus 20:8-11 where it is He who sets iron-clad exact equivalence for the week at Sinai and the week of Genesis 1:2-2:3.

I have yet to see a serious challenge to this inconvenient 'detail'

rather what we get are arguments about why God should not have done that and then going back to Genesis 1 to dig up some inferences to argue that the statement made in Ex 20:8-11 must be totally wrong.. and God should not have said that their week in Exodus 20 was really the same as Genesis 1.

I hope you find what you are looking for.

I think that is a given at this point.

 

[BobRyan]

But as you learned, the "days" in chapter 1, and the "day" in chapter 2, are not calendar days.

As for Genesis 1:2-2:4 your statement is Not true according To God Himself speaking and writing in Exodus 20:8-11 where we see the days of Exodus 20 are drawn out as the same as Genesis 1-2:3

Ex 16
, “This is what the Lord meant: Tomorrow is the Sabbath observance, a holy sabbath to the Lord. Bake what you will bake and boil what you will boil, and all that is left over put aside to be kept until morning.” 24 So they put it aside until morning, as Moses had ordered, and it did not become foul nor was there any worm in it. 25 Moses said, “Eat it today, for today is the Sabbath to the Lord; today you will not find it in the field. 26 Six days you shall gather it, but on the seventh day, the sabbath, there will be none.”
27 It came about on the seventh day that some of the people went out to gather, but they found none.

Sorry, He doesn't say they are calendar days there, either.

True - in Exodus 16 He did not say "six calendar days".

Was your point that they had to starve for a 6 months and eat the 7th month?

Exodus 20 -- do they work for 60 days then rest for 7 minutes?

Exodus 20
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the 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. 11 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.

How much bend-and-wrench can be done to the text and still have that exercise taken seriously?

 

[Jamsie]

The statement God makes - is to show that the units are the same and that the week is the same ... and argues that the Hebrews were to follow that same pattern INSTEAD of saying "scatter 6 days all across any given year... then add a 7th day at any point during the year"

Inserting such ideas is a bend and stretch of Ex 20:8-11 that is abuse of the text beyond all reason. God Himself sets the iron clad equivalence in those verses 8-11 with Genesis 1:2-2:3

It is a "bend and stretch" to not address what is quite clear in the Genesis account as to God's spoken creative directives. (Also, this was not commented on - Genesis 2:4 does not suggest anything to do with "harvest" rather the word used is "tsamach" which means to grow or spring forth.) As noted there is nothing stretched regarding the possibility that the six days refer to command/fiat days not "calendar" days as it still would remain "in six days" with the seventh a day of rest/completion.

If we can agree from the text that the sole operative for creation was "God said,..."then logically any "God made" statements would be explanatory. (Psalm 33:6 – Heb. 11:3 – 2 Peter 3:5) On each day it is clear that God has not Done something but rather to have Said something, not to have Made something but to have Commanded something.

It is also clear that 5 days of commands were mediate not immediate. Gen. 1:3 reads "And God said, Let there be light, and there was light", quite pointedly an immediate command. Yet how can one not take note that subsequent commands are directed in a mediate way directly to separation/the land/water. Again, it could have been written "And God said, let there be vegetation and there was vegetation"... but this was not the case, so why avoided? The command was directed at pre-existing created matter and "it was so". I would suggest that based on the plain reading of the account that "what was so" is God setting in motion all of the laws for the incipient powers, elements, material, etc. as to the natural processes of phenomena to be produced? The immutable God ordered the processes then just as we see today.

One can argue as to what the "Light" was or other specific details but the overall Genesis account clearly has God invoking processes. Genesis 2:9 again refers to "grow" which is not an action of immediacy nor is "planted" in verse 8, and these statements support the "..., Let the land produce...".

The further details that lend credence to the question of time for the fulfillment of God's commands rests on the sixth day. If one looks at all that was supposed to occur within a 24 hour period on day 6 for it to be meaningful would require a much longer period of time.

The specific details of creation remain a mystery but it would seem clear too that one can not dismiss Romans 1:20 in any discussion of Genesis 1-2. There is no stretch, twist, or changes required to assert that the days of creation by "evening and morning" were based solely on God's Commands, and that the total of such days was 6.

 

[The Barbarian]

As for Genesis 1:2-2:4 your statement is Not true according To God Himself speaking and writing in Exodus 20:8-11 where we see the days of Exodus 20 are drawn out as the same as Genesis 1-2:3

So far, no one has been able to show me that when scripture refers to an earlier parable, that transforms it into a literal history. Can you show us your reasons for believing this?

 

[ChristaLife]

I think you are not looking for the truth probably you work for the tabloid and are just trying to find fault. AS YOU CAN SEE YOU ARE ALONE AND I DOUBT IF YOU CAN SAY THE REST ARE WRONG.

IF YOU ARE REALLY SEARCHING FOR THE TRUTH YOU WILL FIND IT BECAUSE GOD WILL OPEN YOUR EYES ONE DAY.;
MAY GOD BLESS YOU.

 

[ChristaLife]

Sorry, He doesn't say they are calendar days there, either.

NewI think you are not looking for the truth probably you work for the tabloid and are just trying to find fault. AS YOU CAN SEE YOU ARE ALONE AND I DOUBT IF YOU CAN SAY THE REST ARE WRONG.

IF YOU ARE REALLY SEARCHING FOR THE TRUTH YOU WILL FIND IT BECAUSE GOD WILL OPEN YOUR EYES ONE DAY.;
MAY GOD BLESS YOU.

 

[The Barbarian]

NewI think you are not looking for the truth

It appears you're trying to avoid the truth by getting personally abusive. It's not a good idea.

probably you work for the tabloid

What's the tabloid?

and are just trying to find fault.

I'm just accepting His word as it is. Do I think it's a mistake for you to add to scripture? Yes, I do.

AS YOU CAN SEE YOU ARE ALONE AND I DOUBT IF YOU CAN SAY THE REST ARE WRONG.

I'm just showing you what God says. You can take it or leave it.

IF YOU ARE REALLY SEARCHING FOR THE TRUTH YOU WILL FIND IT BECAUSE GOD WILL OPEN YOUR EYES ONE DAY.;
MAY GOD BLESS YOU.

Shouting won't make you feel better. Let God be God, and take it His way. You'll be happier, trust Him.

 

[ChristaLife]

So far, no one has been able to show me that when scripture refers to an earlier parable, that transforms it into a literal history. Can you show us your reasons for believing this?

YES NO ONE CAN BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH. YOU MUDDLE THE TRUTH. ONLY GOD CAN HELP YOU SO PRAY TO GOD.

 

[BobRyan]

So far, no one has been able to show me that when scripture refers to an earlier parable, that transforms it into a literal history.

So far no one has pointed to a parable in the Bible during this discussion on creation week.

Can you show us your reasons for believing that someone has?

 

[BobRyan]

Exodus 20
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the 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. 11 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.

vs 11 is a direct reference to Genesis 2:1-3 ... same author, same subject, same event.

Genesis 2:1-3
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 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. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Yes, God had completed commanding the creation processes but still there is no time frame other than 6 days with resting on the seventh. The numerical corresponding to a day has to do with God's command/fiat, .

The statement God makes - is to show that the units are the same and that the week is the same ... and argues that the Hebrews were to follow that same pattern INSTEAD of saying "scatter 6 days all across any given year... then add a 7th day at any point during the year"

Inserting such ideas is a bend and stretch of Ex 20:8-11 that is abuse of the text beyond all reason. God Himself sets the iron clad equivalence in those verses 8-11 with Genesis 1:2-2:3

It is a "bend and stretch" to not address what is quite clear

My point exactly -- which is why I keep bringing out God's own summation of the Genesis 1:2-2:3 creation week account in Exodus 20:11 as it fits perfectly with the week of Exodus 20:8-11.

(Also, this was not commented on - Genesis 2:4 does not suggest anything to do with "harvest" rather the word used is "tsamach" which means to grow or spring forth.)

It has to do with farming - growing plants in a cultivated field - tilling the soil.

5 Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground.

It is all about farming.

See the paper "An Understanding of Genesis 2:5" by Kruger -- second page at this link below.
https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j11_1/j11_1_106-110.pdf



And they were not doing that in Genesis 2 -- rather they were eating from the fruit of the trees.

As noted there is nothing stretched regarding the possibility that the six days refer to command/fiat days not "calendar" days

Until you notice that the same "six days" reference is in Ex 16 and in Exodus 20 and is equated by God himself with the Creation week days.

Bible details matter.

The sun fully created on day 4... and plants on day 3 having evening and morning without the sun as their source of light - but for only one rotation of planet earth.

God himself equating the days of Genesis 1 with the days of Ex 20:8-11

 

[Jamsie]

The statement God makes - is to show that the units are the same and that the week is the same ... and argues that the Hebrews were to follow that same pattern INSTEAD of saying "scatter 6 days all across any given year... then add a 7th day at any point during the year"

Inserting such ideas is a bend and stretch of Ex 20:8-11 that is abuse of the text beyond all reason. God Himself sets the iron clad equivalence in those verses 8-11 with Genesis 1:2-2:3

No, the statements and "God made" are explanatory unless you are suggesting that God's spoken command was not sufficient. Again, you need to address this if you disagree "On each day it is clear that God has not Done something but rather to have Said something, not to have Made something but to have Commanded something." Also, you need to address the very clear commands that state mediate creation, the commands were directed at created matter not to the final outcome, though of course knew exactly the "results" of his spoken commands would be.

You may post the same verses over and over but until one can specifically address the surrounding issues or show where the passage confines the day one, day two, etc. to being consecutive I believe the question of time is quite open.

My point exactly -- which is why I keep bringing out God's own summation of the Genesis 1:2-2:3 creation week account in Exodus 20:11 as it fits perfectly with the week of Exodus 20:8-11.

That is simply reading into the text what you choose. I would simply agree that what was completed was God's created spoken commands. That is what the Bible clearly states... it does not use the term week relative to creation anywhere else. Since the commands as noted are directed to created matter why is it "stretching" or "adding" to interpret the commands as God ordained processes. Why would it be anathema to one to believe that the creation account would involve those processes as we would note today? And why would our reason as posed to us in Romans 1:20 be set to the side?

It has to do with farming - growing plants in a cultivated field - tilling the soil.

See the paper "An Understanding of Genesis 2:5" by Kruger -- second page at this link below.
https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j11_1/j11_1_106-110.pdf

As you are aware the verse is interpreted in depth (Hebrew) by a number of Scholars with different conclusions. Thanks for the link, as I will peruse that along with other differing opinions.

Until you notice that the same "six days" reference is in Ex 16 and in Exodus 20 and is equated by God himself with the Creation week days. Bible details matter.

Until you notice that nowhere in the Bible is the word "week" used in reference to Genesis 1 but only days, and that according to Genesis is in reference to God's spoken commands. One of the arguments is that our current use of week remains the same as from the beginning...then why aren't the processes we see today allowed to have been from the beginning?

God himself equating the days of Genesis 1 with the days of Ex 20:8-11

Yes, days not a week of consecutive days, is the term week available in Hebrew? Again, one needs to address the sixth day. It is clear once more that the command/fiat is to the "land" not to the outcome of His command. "Let the land produce living creatures..." and one can't help but notice God did not say "Let there be living creatures...". So Gen. 1:27 creation of "male and female", then 2:15 God put man in the garden to "work and care", compare Gen. 1:31 to Ge. 2:18. Gen.2:19 naming of the animals, the Gen. 2:22 has Eve, and Adam uses the word "pa‛ămâh" which hints at "at last" or "now" which one would infer a passage of time. Would there not be some passage of time for Adam to work and care for the plants, etc. if not why would he need a `ezer - helper? Would it be a "stretch" to believe that Adam must have had some interaction with the variety of animals, birds, etc. in order to name them, if they were named meaningfully ...and would not that require time? So given the mediate nature of creation how is equating days to commands so far fetched...the Bible is quite clear that each day (5 days) is a command day that involves process.

 

[ChristaLife]

The sun fully created on day 4... and plants on day 3 having evening and morning without the sun as their source of light - but for only one rotation of planet earth.

I agree with you explanation but i will be careful about ROTATION. IT IS POSSIBLE BUT VERY UNLIKELY AND IT HAS NO SIGNIFICANCE IF IT WERE TO HAPPEN BEFORE THE SUN.

I will say ROTATION STARTED WITH THE CREATION OF THE SUN. Because that was when the Sun was created to TAKE CHARGE OF THE LIGHT.

IT SEEMS THE SUN WAS, MOST IMPORTANTLY, MADE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE YEAR AND CREATION OF THE SEASON AND THEN GOD ALSO HANDED IT THE LIGHT, TO RULE THE DAY AS WELL.
REMEMBER ALSO THAT IT WAS NOT JUST ROTATION THE EARTH HAD TO GO THROUGH BUT ALSO REVOLUTION.

Revolution around the sun will lead to THE YEAR AND SUCH REVOLUTION WILL ALSO GIVE US THE SEASONS. God then simply added the day to the sun's duty so that earth rotation will give us the day as it is.

The sun is permanently lit it is the earth rotation that then puts some part in the light while turning away another part from the Sun. Scientist will also tell you a lot more about this arrangement because in it is the ESTABLISHMENT OF PERFECT TIMING.

Genesis 1:14-18 King James Version (KJV)
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

 

[BobRyan]

I agree with you explanation but i will be careful about ROTATION. IT IS POSSIBLE BUT VERY UNLIKELY AND IT HAS NO SIGNIFICANCE IF IT WERE TO HAPPEN BEFORE THE SUN.

I will say ROTATION STARTED WITH THE CREATION OF THE SUN.

Very creative.. and incredibly more unscientific than the Bible account itself could be said to be. The motion of planets in a solar system including the solid principle of conservation of angular momentum is solid science. Each time you add some creative innovation to the chapter you remove it so many steps further from credibility and must rely on your own guess as the source of authority for it.

1. The Bible says there was in fact evening and morning before the creation of the sun - as afterward.

2. The Bible says the days of Genesis 1 are the same as the days of Exodus 20:8-11 at Sinai

3. The Bible says light existed before the Sun and even today nobody argues that the only source of life on Earth or any other place in the universe is limited to fusion reactions with Helium.

The creative nature of your response to these irrefutable details is certainly yours to choose in free will.

 

[BobRyan]

Exodus 20
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the 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. 11 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.

vs 11 is a direct reference to Genesis 2:1-3 ... same author, same subject, same event.

Genesis 2:1-3
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 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. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.



The statement God makes - is to show that the units are the same and that the week is the same ... and argues that the Hebrews were to follow that same pattern INSTEAD of saying "scatter 6 days all across any given year... then add a 7th day at any point during the year"

No, the statements and "God made" are explanatory

No rather the statements show that "God spoke" and "it was so" then the time unit added "and evening and morning where the nth day".

The creative suggestion that the bounded time frame is not in the text that we can all read in that time-boxed chronological sequence is -- not a suggestion that survives much of the text we are reading.

The structure in the text fully supports God's summary of it in Ex 20:11

Gen 1
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.