The Instigator
MindMaster
Pro (for)
The Contender
kenballer
Con (against)

God meant he created the earth in 24 hour days.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
MindMaster has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/28/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 243 times Debate No: 104678
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

MindMaster

Pro

I believe God meant he created the earth in 24 hour days. Before Con accepts, con believes that God meant he created the earth not in 24 hour periods but a longer period of time.
How this debate will go down.
Round 1: Con's acceptance
Round 2: Pro's Arguments and Con's rebuttal
Round 3: Rebuttal of Rebuttals
Round 4: Final Rebuttals and Conclusion
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MUST READ RULES:
1. This is not a debate about if the earth was created 6 days, this is a debate in if God meant 24 hour time periods. Don't debate me on that.
2. Don't accept if you think the bible is NOT a legit form of evidence.
3. Must have evidence to back up your claims.
4. No excuses or lies.
5. I had a debate on this topic before. Use the Hebrew Bible for your evidence and not other bibles.
kenballer

Con

I totally accept this debate!!
Debate Round No. 1
MindMaster

Pro

Evidence that God meant 24 hour time periods.

1. The Hebrew word for day, yom, as in English, is used both for a literal, twenty-four-hour day and also for an indefinite period of time, such as in the expression "For the day of the Lord is at hand" (Joel 1:15). However, the word, yom, always means a twenty-four-hour literal day when it is used with a numeral"day one, day two, first day, second day, etc. There are no exceptions to this rule. In the Genesis Creation account, yom is used with a numeral, indicating that it intends the reader to understand that these are literal days of twenty-four hours.

2. When the Israelites were wandering in the wilderness, God supplied food"manna"every morning. They were to gather only enough for one day"s use. Anything more than that would spoil by the next morning. However, on Friday, they were to gather twice the usual amount of manna, because none would be available Sabbath (Saturday) morning. When they gathered extra manna on Friday for use on Saturday, the extra manna did not spoil (see Exodus 16:11-26). This illustrates that the weekly Sabbath, marking each cycle of seven literal days, continued to be a memorial of Creation week. Thus the weekly cycle is evidence that the days of Creation were literal days of twenty-four hours.

3. God set aside the seventh day of Creation week as a holy rest day. The Israelites kept the Sabbath in the wilderness and continued to observe in the time of Christ (see Luke 4:16; 23:55, 56) and in the time of Paul (see Acts 17:2). Orthodox Jews continue to observe the seventh-day Sabbath even today. The changes made to the calendar from time to time through the centuries has not affected the weekly cycle of seven days. The integrity of the weekly cycle continues and is an evidence for Creation week being composed of seven literal days.

4. The view that each day of the Genesis Creation account is actually an extremely long period of time"rather than literal days of twenty-four hours"causes problems. For example, Genesis says that plants were created on the third day (see Genesis 1:11-13) and that sunlight was created on the fourth day (see verses 14-19). If the third day is actually a long period of time, how could plants have existed without sunlight? Likewise, many plants require insects for pollination. How could these plants have survived and reproduced without insects which were not created until the sixth day (see Genesis 1:24, 25)"if these days were actually long periods of time?

5. The fourth commandment (Exodus 20:8-11) clearly links the seventh day (the Sabbath) with the weekly cycle. The word "remember" at the beginning of this commandment cannot have meaning if the days were long eons of time (much longer than human lifespans). The admonition concerning days of labor and day of rest would also be meaningless.

6. The wording of the creation account in the first two chapters of Genesis is best understood as meaning literal days. Such expressions as "day and night," "evening and morning," "light and darkness" can hardly be understood as indefinite periods of time.

This is my evidence for a 24 hour creation period. Let me see yours.
kenballer

Con

1. There are no exceptions to this rule.

Wrong. There are exceptions. 'The first exception to the "rule" is found in Genesis 29:20, where echad yom refers to a period of seven years that Jacob served Laban to obtain Rachel.

In the book of 1 Samuel, David says that he "will perish one day [echad yom] by the hand of Saul."Obviously, David was not expecting to die in exactly 24 hours. In fact, David was never killed by Saul, but died of old age many decades later.'

'A prophecy from the book of Daniel describes the demise of the ruler of the Syrian kingdom, Seleucus Philopator, the Son of Antiochus the Great. According to Daniel 11:20, "within a few days [echad yom] he will be shattered."

There are several examples where echad yom refers to the Day of the Lord - a period usually interpreted as being seven years in length.Specific examples that specify a period of time longer than 24 hours include the following:

'For behold, the stone that I have set before Joshua; on one stone are seven eyes. Behold, I will engrave an inscription on it,' declares the LORD of hosts, 'and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day [echad yom]. 'In that day,' declares the LORD of hosts, 'every one of you will invite his neighbor to sit under his vine and under his fig tree.'" (Zechariah 3:9-10)

For it will be a unique day [echad yom] which is known to the LORD, neither day nor night, but it will come about that at evening time there will be light. And it will come about in that day that living waters will flow out of Jerusalem, half of them toward the eastern sea and the other half toward the western sea; it will be in summer as well as in winter. (Zechariah 14:7-8)

"He [the Lord] will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him. (Hosea 6:2)

'If we are to interpret echad yom as referring only to a 24 hour day, then people will only be able to invite their neighbors over during one 24 hour period of time. Obviously, Zechariah 3:9-10 refers to an extended period of time. Later in his book, Zechariah describes this "one day" as being "in summer as well as in winter." This verse clearly indicates that this "one day" must be at least six months in length. The third example above is somewhat difficult to interpret, but is often interpreted as representing long periods of time. Gill's commentary says,"...these two and three days may be expressive of a long and short time, as interpreters differently explain them; of a long time, as the third day is a long time for a man to lie dead..." These six examples clearly establish that when yom is used with a number it does not always refer to 24-hour days.' [4]


[4] http://www.godandscience.org...



2. I addressed this within objections 3&6



3. The changes made to the calendar from time to time through the centuries has not affected the weekly cycle of seven days.


If you read the creation account, there is no reference to the end of the seventh day. On every other day, there is "evening and morning, day 'n'." The bible even tells us that the seventh day continues into the present:'


For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: "AND GOD RESTED ON THE SEVENTH DAY FROM ALL HIS WORKS"; (Hebrews 4:4)
Therefore let us be diligent to enter that rest, so that no one will fall, through following the same example of disobedience. (Hebrews 4:11)

'We cannot enter God's seventh day of rest unless it continues to this day, since we were not alive during the first 24 hours after the sixth day. If God's seventh day of rest was 24 hours long, than the author of Hebrews is telling us to do something that is impossible. This is just another example of the problem of assigning each creation day to 24 hours.'[2]
http://www.godandscience.org...




4. If the third day is actually a long period of time, how could plants have existed without sunlight?


This is because Pro's interpretation of those verses are inaccurate.

For instance, the Hebrew phrase translated "heavens and earth"(ha"shamayim we ha"erets) refer to the entire created universe [1]. This Hebrew phrase (known as a merism) means "all the raw materials needed to make sun, planets, stars, nebulae, galaxies, molecules, atoms" or "the entire universe"." So God created the entire heavens and earth at the beginning of the first creation day, which would include the sun and moon.'



5. The word "remember" at the beginning of this commandment cannot have meaning if the days were long eons of time (much longer than human lifespans). The admonition concerning days of labor and day of rest would also be meaningless.

Let us not forget that God also declared a Sabbath for the land, which consists of six years of cultivation followed by a seventh year of rest:

"Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, 'When you come into the land which I shall give you, then the land shall have a sabbath to the LORD. Six years you shall sow your field, and six years you shall prune your vineyard and gather in its crop, but during the seventh year the land shall have a sabbath rest, a sabbath to the LORD; you shall not sow your field nor prune your vineyard.'" (Leviticus 25:2-4)

'This text establishes the principle of six periods of work followed by one period of rest. And in this case, the "days" are one year long. As Christians, we recognize that man's Sabbath week represents the one in seven principle, since we do not rest or devote the actual Sabbath day (Saturday) to worship, but usually do so on the first day of the week (Sunday, the Lord's day). If we insist upon taking this verse concretely, we would have to start worshipping on Saturday only. [2]


6. Such expressions as "day and night," "evening and morning," "light and darkness" can hardly be understood as indefinite periods of time.

First off, days and nights were clearly created on the fourth day.

Secondly, Not all the instances of "morning" and evening" refer to a literal period of time. Here is an example from Moses:

In the morning it [grass] flourishes, and sprouts anew; Toward evening it fades, and withers away. (Psalm 90:6)

'This verse refers to the life cycle of grass (compared to the short life span of humans). Obviously, the grass does not grow up in one morning and die by the same evening. The period of time refers to its birth (morning) and its death (evening) at least several weeks later.'

The first thing one notices when looking at Genesis 1 is the unusual construction surrounding the words morning and evening together with day. This combination is very rare, occurring only ten times in the Old Testament, six of which, of course, are in the Genesis creation account. The remaining verses (NASB) are listed below:


Now on the day that the tabernacle was erected the cloud covered the tabernacle, the tent of the testimony, and in the evening it was like the appearance of fire over the tabernacle, until morning. (Numbers 9:15)

"For seven days no leaven shall be seen with you in all your territory, and none of the flesh which you sacrifice on the evening of the first day shall remain overnight until morning." (Deuteronomy 16:4)

"And the vision of the evenings and mornings which has been told is true; but keep the vision secret, for it pertains to many days in the future." (Daniel 8:26)

'The first two verses obviously refer to 24 hour days, since this is readily apparent from the context. The fourth one refers to many evenings and mornings, which "pertains to many days in the future." This verse actually refers to events that are yet to happen, which is 3000 years of days from when it was originally written. Therefore, One could easily say that these mornings and evenings represent thousands of years. However, none of these verses have the form which is seen in the Genesis account.'[3]

[3] http://www.godandscience.org...

Debate Round No. 2
MindMaster

Pro

1.
Did I ever say echad yom in my first argument? NO, so all of those verses prove nothing because those all mean DAYS and I referred to the word DAY. I would agree that echad yom would be a longer period of time because it refers to multiple days.

Nowhere does it say echad yom in ANY of those verses. Echad yom means "together day" but the correct way to use it is "ehad yom" which means a one day. Go on google translate and do it if you don't believe me.

Despite all of that I am still going to prove your concept of those verses wrong. In 1 Samuel you stated that "David was not expecting to die in exactly 24 hours." That's right, he meant one day, I will die, as in a day in the future. In Daniel 11:20, it never says ehad yom, it says "u be ya mim" which means DAYS not DAY. Also, New Living Translation states, "In a few years" making this statement irrelevant.
In Zechariah 14:7-8, it never says ehad yom. Plus, in that chapter, they talk about the prophecies about Jesus' death and resurrection. Same with Hosea 6:2.

2.
Tell me where it says the 7th day continues into the present.
Hebrew 4:4 doesn't say yom, but instead says hebdomes, which means "the seventh [day]"

3. Genesis 1:1, In the BEGINNING, God created the heavens and the earth. It says nowhere the first day, it only states the beginning. You also stated that it mentions all the raw materials to make stars, planets, etc. But you never said they MADE the sun on the first day. Even though I proved this argument wrong in the first sentence, I would like for you to provide evidence that those materials made the Sun and planets on the First Day.

4. Tell me where it says that this should apply to others. This only applies to this and cannot apply it to another without concrete evidence.

5. Genesis 1:3
And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning"the first day. "First off, days and nights were clearly created on the fourth day." Completely wrong.

6. I agree with the first argument but nowhere in that verse says "day." But I know this isn't your main argument but this doesn't prove that the evening and morning referred to in Genesis is not legit evening and morning. The last verse refers to many evenings and morning.

I know this doesn't cover everything but I tried to cover most of it. I didn't have much time write this rebuttal. :)
kenballer

Con

1. so all of those verses prove nothing because those all mean DAYS and I referred to the word DAY.

Wrong. The number used for "first day" is the actual meaning to the Hebrew word echad:

Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions:
echaM0;d (Strong's H259)

1. one (number)

a. one (number)

b. each, every

c. a certain

d. an (indefinite article)

e. only, once, once for all

f. one...another, the one...the other, one after another, one by one

g. first

h. eleven (in combination), eleventh (ordinal)

2. Tell me where it says the 7th day continues into the present.
Hebrew 4:4 doesn't say yom, but instead says hebdomes, which means "the seventh [day]"

First off, Pro is not backing his claims up with evidence but merely making assertions. Secondly, even if I grant what he is saying and my source is somehow false, Hebrews 4:4-11 is obviously in parallel with Genesis 2:2. Thus, Hebrews does not have to mention yom since the context of those verses are clearly referring to the creation account.

3. this doesn't prove that the evening and morning referred to in Genesis is not legit evening and morning. The last verse refers to many evenings and morning.

Correct, but it does refute your argument suggesting that they are legit. For example, yom occurs only 4 times outside Genesis in combination with both Hebrew words for "evening" and "morning." The actual word order of "evening" followed by "morning" in combination with yom (as seen in Genesis 1) occurs only once outside Genesis 1. However, this one verse that comes from Daniel 8:26 defines yom as a period of time at least 3000 years long, which happens to be the only verse that perfectly matches the usage found in Genesis 1:

"The vision of the evenings [ereb] and mornings [boqer] Which has been told is true; But keep the vision secret, For it pertains to many days [yom] in the future." (Daniel 8:26)

Lastly, the actual number of words in Hebrew is much fewer than that of the English translations. The words "and there was" are not in the Hebrew, but added to make the English flow better. The actual translation is "evening and morning 'n' day." There is no way to discern from the context that the text is referring to 24 hour days.
http://www.godandscience.org...

4. Genesis 1:1, In the BEGINNING, God created the heavens and the earth. It says nowhere the first day, it only states the beginning. You also stated that it mentions all the raw materials to make stars, planets, etc. But you never said they MADE the sun on the first day. Even though I proved this argument wrong in the first sentence, I would like for you to provide evidence that those materials made the Sun and planets on the First Day.

Tell me where it says that this should apply to others. This only applies to this and cannot apply it to another without concrete evidence.


I have decided to fully explain the old earth creationist view of Day 1 and 4:

'There are two main interpretations of what 1:1 really means. Some say that the verse is a summary of the rest of the Genesis creation account. Others say that the verse represents the first creative act of God. How can we tell which interpretation is correct?

The answer is simple. When we look at Genesis 1:2,3 we see that it begins with the conjunction "and." This fact immediately tells us that Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 are part of one continuous thought. Remove the period at the end of Genesis 1:1 and read it as originally intended.

The conjunction at the beginning of Genesis 1:2 tells us that Genesis 1:1 is not a summary of the creation account! This verse is a factual statement of what God did at the beginning of the first day. This is why it does not say "Then God said" in verse 1:1 like other verses within each Day order. There are other context clues that tell us that this is not a summary statement. If we continue reading the Genesis creation account, we come to the real summary at the end (Genesis 2:1). It would be superfluous to have a second summary at the beginning. As we continue to read Genesis one, we will notice how succinct the creation account really is.

Thus, we can conclude that the text claims that God created the heavens and earth on the first day. What do the heavens consist of? Stars, galaxies, etc. So, we know that God created, at minimum, the stars and the earth. However, the Hebrew phrase translated "heavens and earth"(ha"shamayim we ha"erets) refer to the entire created universe [1]. This Hebrew phrase (known as a merism) means "all the raw materials needed to make sun, planets, stars, nebulae, galaxies, molecules, atoms", "the entire universe", OR "the organized universe, the cosmos." Some people claim that God created the earth first and that the rest of the heavenly bodies were created later. However, we are led to contemplate why God said that He created the "heavens and the earth." To accept this interpretation, we would have to say that God created "nothing" and the earth. If God had only created the earth, the Genesis 1:1 would have said, "In the beginning God created the earth."

In Genesis 1:2, It is important to examine the context and the perspective to determine where the action is happening. If you establish the wrong point of view, it is going to lead to the day 1 and 4 contradiction everyone one has pointed out. After reading the text in Genesis 1:2, Where is God? In heaven? In outer space? NO! God is on the surface of the waters of the earth doing His creating "up close and personal."

The other important thing about Genesis 1:2 is that it defines the conditions as they appeared from God's perspective on the surface of the earth. What are the conditions? ...the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep..." Why was the earth dark? Genesis one does not say, but God Himself tells us the answer in Job 38:4-9 that it was dark because it was covered with thick clouds:

"Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? ...When I made a cloud its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band" (Job 38:4-9)

Furthermore, In verse 14 we have the same construction of "let there be” but, as discussed before, it is a statement of appearance NOT creation. At this point, the clouds present at the initial creation of the earth were completely removed so that the bodies themselves appeared for the first time on the surface of the earth.

The passage tells us that the lights were allowed "to be" so that they could be signs of the seasons, days, and years. Verse 18 gives us another hint. The lights were placed in the sky to "separate the light from the darkness." Does this sound familiar? It is the exact Hebrew phrase used for God's work on the first day when, "God separated the light from the darkness" (Genesis 1:4) By using this phrase, the text is recounting the formation of the Sun, moon and stars from the first day. This means that the actual 24 hour period Pro is arguing for is ONLY mentioned on Day 4 NOT the entire week.

Now, Pro might insist that Genesis 1:16-18 is not a continuation but separate because it said the word "made", which is also considered to be a creative act in English. However, we need be consistent with the Hebrew text not an English. If that word was referring to a creative act, it would have said it like the other verses in the text. Instead, the Hebrew word for “made” mentioned in verse 16 is "Asah", which means to fabricate or fashion pre-existing material. On the other hand, The Hebrew word for "created" (bara) means to create out of nothing. It is a completed verb form, meaning only that the creation was accomplished at some point in the past. Moreover, the Hebrew word "Bara" also carries the concept of creating something new. The completed action can be translated "had created," or "did create." If translated "created," the created must be understood as "created already" to reflect the Hebrew.' [1]

[1] http://www.godandscience.org...;






In the next round, I will lay out my case for days longer than 24 hours.

Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by kenballer 2 months ago
kenballer
Ken if the use of reason and logic were to prove that your god does not exist would you still seek a relationship with him?

No, only scientific evidence would keep me from doing so now. For instance, If empirical evidence shows how God can have all those attributes and still be true, then pure philosophical arguments attempting to show an inconsistency are meaningless and are annulled automatically. This means that even if I accepted that your strawman argument you are about to give me, it would not matter according to science.
Posted by kenballer 2 months ago
kenballer
Ken if the use of reason and logic were to prove that your god does not exist would you still seek a relationship with him?

No, only scientific evidence would keep me from doing so now. For instance, If empirical evidence shows how God can have all those attributes and still be true, then pure philosophical arguments attempting to show an inconsistency are meaningless and are annulled automatically. This means that even if I accepted that your strawman argument you are about to give me, it would not matter according to science.
Posted by missmedic 2 months ago
missmedic
Ignoring all the contradictions, makes your arguments moot. You may as argue that there are cartoon fleas on cartoon dogs. The arrogances needed to claim to know a gods intentions, can only come from the religious mind.
Ken if the use of reason and logic were to prove that your god does not exist would you still seek a relationship with him?
Posted by cakerman 2 months ago
cakerman
1, did anyone ever contest that the days were 24 hours long?

and 2, If you want to use the Torah specifically I would put that into the title so no misinterpretation happens
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.