The Instigator
RhysEPC
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AlextheYounga
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

The world was created in six twenty four hour periods.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
AlextheYounga
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/2/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 686 times Debate No: 105476
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (24)
Votes (3)

 

RhysEPC

Pro

This debate is on whether or whether not the world was created in six twenty four hour periods.

Rules: this debate is on the Hebrew Bible only no other bible.
AlextheYounga

Con

I left a comment questioning the rules of this debate, but I see that your only requirement is that I refer to the Hebrew Bible and no other Bible.

So I accept these rules. BUT, I would like to make it clear that I am not here to prove that the Bible doesn't say the Earth was not created in six days. It does state this quite clearly in Genesis and it would be pointless to argue otherwise.

My goal here is to prove that the creation in Genesis is logically inconsistent. To prove that a statement is logically inconsistent, at the very least, proves that the statement is false in its current form, and at its extreme can completely disprove the claim of that statement.

Does my opponent agree to these rules and guidelines?
Debate Round No. 1
RhysEPC

Pro

I agree with your guidelines and like to begin. First off, The Hebrew word for the 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.

Thank you for reading you may now rebute my argument.

AlextheYounga

Con

Sure, as far as I know, everything you're saying is true.

The point I'll make rests on a problem of chronological order.

First days of Genesis:
Day 1: God creates Heavens and Earth
Day 2: God creates light and seperates this from darkness, and calls the light day and the darkness night
Day 3: God creeates dry land seas
Day 4: God creates the Sun and the Moon

Several problems here. The entire concept of the word day - the word yom- depends solely on Earth's position in relation to the Sun. The Sun is what creates the lightness of day, and the absense of sunlight creates darkness. The statement that God created light and day before the Sun, is logically inconsistent - rendering the entire foundations of Genesis false in this form.
Debate Round No. 2
RhysEPC

Pro


First off, on your timeline you were incorrect.


On day one, God created light and darkness and called the light, day and the darkness, night.
Day two: He created the seas.
Day three: He created dry land and created vegetation.
Day four: He created Sun and moon.


From Day 1 to Day 3, God produced the light for the vegetation. On day 4, he created the Sun and the Moon to give light to the world. The vegetation then fed off sunlight.

The sun and the moon gives us a sense of time it is not time its self. God made the sun to first heat us, and secondly to let us be able to track when the day begins and lets us track when the Sabbath day begins.
AlextheYounga

Con

Thank you for correcting my mistake on the sequence of events, although it doesn't change my argument.

That's very convenient to say, "From Day 1 to Day 3, God produced the light for the vegetation. On day 4, he created the Sun/Moon" This is not written in Genesis; you're simply crafting a story to back your claim.

You have not satisfied your burden of proof. The resolution is that the world was created in six 24 hour periods. The etymology of the word yom, the meat of your argument, is not a reasonable explanation for the creation of Earth.

That someone long ago wrote that God created Earth in 6 days is also not reasonable evidence. The wheelbarrow was a mechanical marvel in that time; it's understandable he forgot daylight comes from the Sun
Debate Round No. 3
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by AlextheYounga 7 months ago
AlextheYounga
I wish I could have explained my thoughts more fully because I find this topic interesting. I thank my opponent for starting this debate, but I would politely ask that next time they allow a higher character limit for each post
Posted by Emilrose 7 months ago
Emilrose
[R3.]

Pro responds by stating that Cons timeline is 'incorrect' and attempts to explain how so, but what remains evident is the logical implausibility within his stance. I.e, light is what the sun provides, but Con appears to distinguish the two. Con clearly fails to understand Pros *key point* which is that sunlight is what creates a day and not vice-versa.

Con concludes his argument by noting that Pro has ultimately failed to fulfill his BoP. Con additionally reiterates that terminology doesn't equate evidence (in the case of the yom-day argument) and that Pro failed to realize that the daylight comes from the sun.

==Vote==

Due to Pro not fulfilling his BoP (additionally keeping in mind that he accepted Cons guidelines) *and* that Con rebutted main argument by highlighting that sunlight is necessary for a day to begin, I vote CON.
Posted by Emilrose 7 months ago
Emilrose
RFD

[R1.]

Pro simply states that the contender must accept the Hebrew bible as the only source; the resolution is 'the world was created in six twenty four hour periods.'

Con accepts, but makes it clear that he will not argue that Genesis states that the world was made in six days, but will rather argue that it is logically implausible. Con has a more detailed/thorough explanation of his stance and upcoming arguments.

[R2.]

Pro agrees with Cons 'guidelines'; thus putting himself at a disadvantage. *If* Pro had re-stated that he was *only* arguing that the Hebrew bible outlines the world as being created in six days, he may have had a chance at winning by default or by playing at semantics.

Pro then argues that on the basis of Hebrew terminology, in which 'day' means 'yom', the world must've been made in six days. Which, as Con later rebuts, fails to prove anything. Once more, this is a problem for Pro due to him previously accepting Cons 'guidelines', which explicitly state that Genesis may be an inerrant source for concluding how and for what duration the world come into existence *and* that the resolution 'the world was created in six twenty four hour periods' is 'logically inconsistent'.

Con begins his argument by acknowledging that Pro has (thus far) correctly referred to the biblical account. However, Pros case is considerably weakened by Con arguing: 'the entire concept of the word day - the word yom- depends solely on Earth's position in relation to the Sun. The Sun is what creates the lightness of day, and the absense of sunlight creates darkness. The statement that God created light and day before the Sun, is logically inconsistent - rendering the entire foundations of Genesis false in this form.'

So, if the sun creates light, which is what makes a day, it is logically implausible for a day to be created before light.

**to be continued**
Posted by RhysEPC 7 months ago
RhysEPC
WHEN YOU VOTE PLEASE DONT VOTE "TIE" VOTE CON OR PRo
Posted by AlextheYounga 7 months ago
AlextheYounga
Oh man, what a potent typo.

Hopefully it is not held against me, but I used a double negative of sorts when saying "I am not here to prove that the Bible doesn't say the Earth was *not* created in six days." Please exclude this word *not*
Posted by AlextheYounga 7 months ago
AlextheYounga
I would like to debate you, but to be clear, you're saying that the only reference I can use is the Bible? The Bible does say that the Earth was created in six days; would I have to debate you that it doesn't say that? Or can I refer to logic? Would you allow me the chance to attempt to prove that Genesis doesn't make logical sense, referring as little as possible to science, and more on the logical consistencies of Genesis?
Posted by Nudely 7 months ago
Nudely
Yeah, this is the silliest debate ever. It stipulates that the Bible is true when it obviously isn't. Some truth might be extracted from the book here and there in small snippets, but it is hearsay, upon hearsay which originates with the most unscientific myth weavers of prehistory. The Bible is 66 different books with no common theme throughout all, and likely created by 100 authors, or more. Genesis alone is thought to have at least four voices, possibly five. i find it interesting that modern Hebrew archaeology has ruled out the possibility of the Exodus, and yet well-meaning saps still believe in the ancient tangled Torah.

If you've never read Thomas Paine's "Age of Reason," y'all owe yourselves a huge favor ;-)

~Nudely~
Posted by frankfurter50 7 months ago
frankfurter50
I'd accept, but I don't think I can debate you without fighting for the scientific viewpoint. I mean, the Hebrew bible DOES say it was made in six days, and I can't deny that, but I could argue with you using science.
Posted by Creation_21 7 months ago
Creation_21
I fully agree with you @RhysEPC! the earth was created in six literal 24 hour days, thanks for supporting whats right!
Posted by MindMaster 7 months ago
MindMaster
@Debating_Horse

I think @RhysEPC meant was that God created the earth in 24 hour days instead of Long periods of time. This isn't debating on creationism and atheism, this is debating on the creation account of Genesis and the what the Bible meant.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 7 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
RhysEPCAlextheYoungaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con by default!
Vote Placed by Khons 7 months ago
Khons
RhysEPCAlextheYoungaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Even though I am a christian I believe that the world was created in a longer period of time so saying that the world was created in a single period of time, is not what I believe, and Con showed that to me in their arguments.
Vote Placed by Emilrose 7 months ago
Emilrose
RhysEPCAlextheYoungaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.