The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Was the earth created in six, legit, 24 hour time 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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 836 times Debate No: 104556
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




In Genesis, did God really mean 24-hour time periods or was is something else? I believe that he did mean legit 24-hour time periods. Con will argue otherwise.
How this debate will go down.
Round 1: Con's acceptance
Round 2: Pro's Arguments and Con's rebuttal
Round 3: Rebuttals and Conclusions
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.
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.


I accept the debate: arguing the creation days are not literal "24-hour periods."
Debate Round No. 1


Here I will supply some evidence from other websites myself to prove that the days were, in fact, 24-hour time periods.

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.

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 and in the time of Paul. 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.

The views 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 and that sunlight was created on the fourth day. 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 if these days were actually long periods of time?

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. 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.

The Bible tells us that Adam was created on the sixth day. If he lived through day six and day seven, and then died when he was 930 years old, and if each of these days was a thousand or a million years, you have major problems! On the fourth day of creation, we are given the comparison of day to night and days to years. If the word "day" doesn"t mean an ordinary day, then the comparison of day to night and day to years becomes meaningless.

And now for the mother of all evidence, if you think about it, an infinite Creator God could have created everything in no time. Why, then, did He take as long as six days? The answer is given in Exodus 20:11. Here we find that God tells us that He deliberately took six days and rested for one as a pattern for man"this is where the seven-day week comes from. The seven-day week has no basis for existing except Scripture. If one believes that the days of creation are long periods of time, then the week becomes meaningless.

All of these facts and evidence proves that the earth was created in 6, 24-hour days. :)


My opponent put forth the premise "was THE EARTH created in 6 [literal] 24-hour time periods". He must demonstrate through the context of the Bible that it "took God SIX DAYS" to "CREATE the earth" with "24-hour time periods" totally 6 days. He will not be able to do so & should concede to his blunder, hand over the victory, then, put forth another contextually restricted premise to be defeated in that debate as well. "It is," like Mr. Spock, says oh so well, "only logical."
Light on the 1st Day
Sun, moon, & stars on the 4th Day
Man on the 6th Day
Earth could not be created in 6 days as Pro keeps erroneously stating.

Demonstrating the Multiple Understandings of Day

Despite Pro's best efforts to semantically reveal a "24-hour period" IN Genesis, he has failed. Based on my opponent's own guidelines he is to present contextual evidence WITHIN Genesis that the "creation day" IS a "24-hour period". He has not shown this IN any part of Genesis. Because that information cannot be extracted from the Genesis text. Pro established the parameters that the definition of "[legit] 24-hour time periods" must be presented from "[with]in Genesis" by him, and by me, Con, must "argue otherwise." Other books of the Bible used, should be only for substantiating & providing examples for the definition of "day" found in Genesis.
Furthermore, what my opponent has done is "assumed" that these words: "day", "evening", & "morning" are concrete evidence of a context depicting a "24-hour period" WITH the Genesis Creation Account. An "assumption" seems to convey this. An "assumption."

Therefore to prove that view is not only an "assumption" but also contextually incorrect, I must present CONCRETE contextual evidence that states the EXACT OPPOSITE. This is the ONLY logical way to debunk my opponent. I cannot give the judges "another assumption." It must be concrete contextual evidence IN Genesis that clearly conveys the "days" were not "24-hour periods."

Biblical Principle of Duality

Job 11:6 explains that the "secret wisdom" of the Bible is double, meaning having a double meaning. Several examples will follow because they conclusively reveal the creation days have double meaning. Or as the Christians call it "the Principle of Duality."
The Genesis "Days" are not 24-hour periods.
The Exodus 20:11 "Days" are 24-hour periods.
Pro makes an illogical assumption: "If one believes that the days of creation are long periods of time, then the week becomes meaningless."
Wrong. The two passages above don't cancel out each other because the application is completely different.
Genesis Creation Account deals with God's 6 days of work. God rest on the 7th.
Exodus 20:11 deals with Man's 6 days of work. Man rest on the 7th.
The applications are different & the principles are flipped.

Demonstrating the Similitude Understanding of Evening & Morning

What we see in the Genesis Creation Account isn't human time boundaries, it's supernatural creation. The terms "evening & morning" cannot be used as a unilateral measure since the average person knows the book called "the Bible" contains similitudes. A similitude is a term that replaces the conventional understanding with another expression.

"My sword shall be bathed in heaven"
This is not literally referring to a "sword" "taking a bath" in "atmospheric clouds clusters" or "an invisible realm". It makes no logical sense if that were the case. Therefore, common sense tells us it MUST be a similitude or gibberish talk. Which is it: gibberish or similitude?
Leviticus 26:7 explains "sword" means "war/warfare"
Lamentations 2:1; Deuteronomy 11:21 explains "heaven" is another term for "earthly rulership".
The rest of the context tells us this war is divine judgment that drenches an Idumean earthly rulership in bloodshed & death because they are the people of God's curse. It's not gibberish but rather a similitude.
So can the evening & the morning phrase be a similitude also?
Sirach 18:24-26 explains "evening & morning" as a similitude MEANS "a long undetermined passage of time".

Psalm 90:5-7
You carry them away like a flood;
They are like a sleep.
In the morning they [sinful Israelites] are like grass which grows up:
In the morning it flourishes and grows up;
In the evening it is cut down and withers.
For we [sinful Israelites] have been consumed by Your anger,
And by Your wrath we are terrified.
The nature of the context isn't restricting the morning & the evening to hour units but to long passages of time & instances that allows things to flourish, blossom to full potential, and then swiftly get cut down.
It takes 10-15 years for a red maple tree to flourish into full bloom. But it take a lumberjack less than 3 minutes to saw it down.

Sirach 18:24-26
Think of his wrath on the day of death,
and of the moment of vengeance when he turns away his face.
In the time of plenty think of the time of hunger;
in the days of wealth think of poverty and need.
From morning to evening conditions change,
and all things move swiftly before the Lord.

Notice the context of the "morning to evening" time changing conditions are linked to how time passes with God--not mankind. Which takes us back to "day" in Genesis, that it cannot be restricted to just 24 hours. The morning to evening context here pertains to the similitude of "a long undetermined passage of time" that looks like hours in a day to a timeless Entity. Now the "day of death" & "days of wealth" pertain to man. Consider logical deduction:

For man
Days of wealth (Morning)=many years/decades
Day of Death (Evening)=a single moment
For God
Days of wealth (Morning)=Israel's rulership
Day of Death (Evening)=Israel"s destruction

The Bible Gives "Day" Different Time Applications
2 Peter 3:8; Psalms 90:4 <> This verse is a duality: (A.) A 1,000 YEARS is LIKE a single day to God; (B.) A biblical DAY can be UP to 1,000 years to God.

2 Peter 3:10 <> This verse is a similitude. The Day of the Lord is NOT a single 24-hour period, but a particular time period of God"s wrath on the nations for what they've done to the Israelites. Also it isn't a 1,000 years or up to a 1,000 years.

We have "day" as a similitude for a "1,000 years."
Evening & morning/morning to evening as a similitude for "long undetermined passage of time".
Debate Round No. 2


If it's not 24 hour periods, what length of time is it?

Hebrew word used for day in Genesis is "yom". Same word is used for Noah's flood "40 days and 40 nights" If you do not believe that Genesis was 6 literal 24 hour periods, then your logic would assume that it also did not rain for literal 40 24 hour days, but rather an "unknown length of time that only relates to god."

The Hebrew word for days (plural) in Exodus is "ya-mim". This word means days, but also means "of time". Given this word, we could assume it means indefinite periods of time as in "days on end".

All other verses are irrelevant to the creation passages.

Referring to your" duality", if we're talking about man it's literal 24 hour periods, but if we're talking about god it's not? What is it then? You provided zero arguments in that spiel. Psalm is poetry. Genesis is history. Very different.

So you're telling me that psalms morning is different than other mornings and according to your principle of duality, every single word, in the bible means a different thing?

Is Psalm, morning is "boqur". So from what you're saying, every single morning in the bible is different? This is the worst argument.


Here's is Just 92 Prophecies in the Psalms (with an overall total of 116)
Prophecy can be written in poetic verse. History can be written in poetic verse. Prophecy is history.
You've been debunked.

The Bible Gives "Day" Different Time Applications
2 Peter 3:8; Psalms 90:4 <> These verses are dual: (A.) 1,000 YEARS is LIKE a single day to God; (B.) A biblical DAY can be UP to 1,000 years to God.

2 Peter 3:10 <> This verse is a similitude. The Day of the Lord is NOT a single 24-hour period, but a particular time period of God"s wrath on the nations for what they"ve done to the Israelites. Also it isn"t a 1,000 years or up to a 1,000 years.

God called Light Day
If we restrict the Genesis Creation "Day" to 24-hours, then Pro has essentially stated, through this wrong application of: "God called the light Day"--Did God called "light" "24 HOURS" or a "24-hour period?" Get it? God named "light" 24 full hours. But we only witness 12 hours of light before darkness begins it"s shift. So is the 12 hours of darkness considered light too? You cannot rectify this blunder since you claim the Genesis "Day" is "24 hours". Pro has argued his premise into an illogical corner.

Genesis 2:4 Utterly Debunks Pro"s Argument
Genesis 2:4 <> This verse states the 6 Day Creation Period were "6 Generations." It utterly debunks my opponent"s argument. Like I stated earlier, no assumption will suffice. a logical-thinking person concrete evidence. Here is the contextually concrete evidence. Consider the evidence:

"These are the generations OF the heavens AND of the earth when they were created, IN THE DAY that the Lord God MADE the earth and the heavens" (Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 2:4 - King James Version).
Speed Logic Questions!
1. Is a "generation" a 24 hour period?
2. Did God create the heavens & earth in single day ["in the DAY the Lord God made [them]"]?
3. Doesn"t a single day-creation contradict the contextual use of multiple generations of creation?
4. Doesn"t Genesis 2:4 contradict the contextual explanations of a single week of 7 consecutive evenings & a mornings if they literally mean 24 hours each?

Now look AT THE TEXT. Answer these two questions: (a.) Is the verse implying God created the heavens & the earth "in a [single] day"? OR (b.) Is the verse implying God created the heavens & the earth over a "few generations" beginning it all "ON a specific day"? Look AT THE TEXT. The English explains itself--if--if--IF you LET IT!

(a.) The generations are 6 "periods of time progressions" called 6 Days. Similitude!

(b.) The "day" at the end of the verse is alluding to God beginning creation ON a specific day. A day"a time period"that started the ball rolling.

(c.) A biblical generation is (i.) 40, 70, or 100 years for MANKIND (Psalm 90:10; Isaiah 65:20); (ii.) a general allocated period of time as EVENING TO MORNING [Morning to Evening] or as THE DAY OF THE LORD (Sirach 18:24-26); and (iii.) a thousand years for GOD (2 Peter 3:8).

Wait! There"s more!
Genesis 5:1
"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him." So did God create Adam in a single day or over a few generations? Look at the text. The "generations of Adam" is contextually linked to "in the DAY that God created man"? Why doesn"t it just say "him"? Why does it say "man"? Because multiple MEN were created over a few generations BEFORE Eve was made! Let"s stick to the day element (the other two elements are for another debate)>>[Multiple men created WITH Adam; and; How did Plant Life Grow over a Generation w/o Sunlight].

The "Adam" in verse 1 refers to the Hebrew understanding of adam as in "mankind" ( The "day" refers to the "generations of mankind" WHEN THEY were created. Proving again, a "day" IN Genesis IN connection with supernatural creation refers to "generation [a long undetermined passage of time]" and not a "24-hour period."

When you start dabbling into foreign languages that you"re not well-versed in, confusion follows. If you stick to your native language that you understand & comprehend so well, clarity follows.
Stick to the English, sir. The context is in English. It get"s the job done better than Hebrew & Greek.

It"s not biblical to assume man was created by the snap of God"s finger or within a matter of hours. Ecclesiastes states "there is a time for everything". During the 6th generation time period, an X-amount of mankind was gradually created through a natural biological creation process. Jeremiah 18:6 states God will mold the Israelites into the perfect representation of his creation like a potter does with clay. The same principle applies with the physical creation of mankind: a gradual molding & bonding of blood, flesh, and bones into LIVING SOULS over a generation, not 24 hours, not a 1,000 years.

A woman does not create a baby in 24 hours. She creates him, so to speak, over 9 LONG months. Which ultimately makes more divine sense for a perfectionist holy creative Father to do: (a.) create his FIRST PHYSICAL son in 24 hours or (b.) make him the baddest, coolest, handsomest prototype ever over 40 well-thought out years (generation)?

Genesis 2:4"s "generations" make this not only contextually plausible but firm that the Genesis Creation Account took 7 literal generations to complete, not 7 literal 24-hour days. Each generation was divided into an Evening Phase & Morning Phase to complete the biological growth of matter. The duality principle coherent with the context surrounding it.

Genesis Creation Account deals with God's 6 days of work. God rest on the 7th.
Exodus 20:11 deals with Man's 6 days of work. Man rest on the 7th.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by RichardCypher 2 years ago
Looking for some contributors to this debate:
Posted by Stonehe4rt 2 years ago

While I do think I could answer your question, that could also influence the debate. Hopefully we will see that answer in this debate.
Posted by divergent_ambon 2 years ago
And if Genesis 1 isn't literal in any sense, can we argue that? Clearly it's 24 hour days, but it's not literal.
Posted by PowerPikachu21 2 years ago
God's described as perfect. If you think about it, why would it take him more than one minute to make a world if he's so knowledgeable and powerful?
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.