The Seven Days of Creation

[Wick Stick]

Genesis 1 enumerates 7 days for the creation. It painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next with the repetitive phrase, "and there was evening, and there was morning, the Xth Day."

I don't think those time frames are literal. Get out your torches and pitchforks.

Just to be clear, I DO think the chapter is about the literal creation of the world. This isn't one of Aesop's fables.

But I read something recently that suggests to me that the enumeration of 7 days itself... that is probably a poetic device. What I read was a translation of another ancient story, named Aqhat. This story was engraved on stone around the time that Moses lived, and unearthed in Ugarit in modern days by archaeologists.

The story contains a section that looks very similar to Genesis 1's week of creation. I've included the sectoin at the bottom of this post so you can read it for yourself. As you do, take note of the progression over a period of 7 days, and of the repetitive language that painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next. The main character dresses, goes to offer sacrifices to the gods, praying that he might conceive a son, and then undresses, goes to bed, gets up the next day and repeats it all again.

It seems that this repetition over a period of 7 days is a literary form. It expresses the passage of time - of a long time. The repetition causes the reader/hearer of the story to experience the passage of time. If you read below, you will suffer alongside the main character as he waits and persists in petitioning the gods for a son. You might be happy to know that he is granted his request.

Then Danel, the man of Rapau,

the Hero, the man of the Harnamite,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

He cast off his cloak and lay down,

put off his garment and spent the night​

One day passed, and on the second

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

A third day passed, and on the fourth

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

A fifth day passed, and on the sixth

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

Danel cast off his cloak and lay down,

cast off his cloak and lay down,​

put off his garment and spent the night.​

Then, on the seventh day, Baal approached...

from Stories from Ancient Canaan, by Coogan & Smith

 

[keithr]

Genesis 1 enumerates 7 days for the creation. It painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next with the repetitive phrase, "and there was evening, and there was morning, the Xth Day."

I don't think those time frames are literal. Get out your torches and pitchforks.

From the 10 commandments, Exodus 20 (WEB):

(1) God spoke all these words, saying,​

(8) “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.​

(9) You shall labor six days, and do all your work,​

(10) but the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yahweh your God. You shall not do any work in it, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your livestock, nor your stranger who is within your gates;​

(11) for in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore Yahweh blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy.​

God repeats it in Exodus 31 (WEB):

(12) Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,​

(16) Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.​

(17) It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.’”​

Every occurrence of the word day or days in those passages is translated from the same Hebrew word (yom), which is the same Hebrew word used in Genesis 1 that's translated as day. This convinces me that the creation occurred in 6 days (144 hours).

 

[Wick Stick]

From the 10 commandments, Exodus 20 (WEB):

(1) God spoke all these words, saying,​

(8) “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.​

(9) You shall labor six days, and do all your work,​

(10) but the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yahweh your God. You shall not do any work in it, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your livestock, nor your stranger who is within your gates;​

(11) for in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore Yahweh blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy.​

God repeats it in Exodus 31 (WEB):

(12) Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,​

(16) Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.​

(17) It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.’”​

Every occurrence of the word day or days in those passages is translated from the same Hebrew word (yom), which is the same Hebrew word used in Genesis 1 that's translated as day. This convinces me that the creation occurred in 6 days (144 hours).

I don't see why those quotes would prevent Genesis 1 from using a poetic device to express the passage of time.

It seems that rather than address the argument I presented, you've decided to throw some unrelated verses at me.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
● Gen 2:1-2 . .The heaven and the earth were finished, and all their array.
On the seventh day God finished the work that He had been doing, and He
ceased on the seventh day from all the work that He had done.

An important thing to note is that the other six days were bounded by an
evening and a morning whereas the seventh isn't bounded at all; indicating
that it hasn't ended, i.e. God is still on His creation sabbatical and has yet to
come back to work and pick up where He left off. (cf. Heb 4:1-14)
_

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Genesis 1 enumerates 7 days for the creation. It painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next with the repetitive phrase, "and there was evening, and there was morning, the Xth Day."

I don't think those time frames are literal. Get out your torches and pitchforks.

Just to be clear, I DO think the chapter is about the literal creation of the world. This isn't one of Aesop's fables.

But I read something recently that suggests to me that the enumeration of 7 days itself... that is probably a poetic device. What I read was a translation of another ancient story, named Aqhat. This story was engraved on stone around the time that Moses lived, and unearthed in Ugarit in modern days by archaeologists.

The story contains a section that looks very similar to Genesis 1's week of creation. I've included the sectoin at the bottom of this post so you can read it for yourself. As you do, take note of the progression over a period of 7 days, and of the repetitive language that painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next. The main character dresses, goes to offer sacrifices to the gods, praying that he might conceive a son, and then undresses, goes to bed, gets up the next day and repeats it all again.

It seems that this repetition over a period of 7 days is a literary form. It expresses the passage of time - of a long time. The repetition causes the reader/hearer of the story to experience the passage of time. If you read below, you will suffer alongside the main character as he waits and persists in petitioning the gods for a son. You might be happy to know that he is granted his request.

Then Danel, the man of Rapau,

the Hero, the man of the Harnamite,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

He cast off his cloak and lay down,

put off his garment and spent the night​

One day passed, and on the second

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

A third day passed, and on the fourth

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

A fifth day passed, and on the sixth

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

Danel cast off his cloak and lay down,

cast off his cloak and lay down,​

put off his garment and spent the night.​

Then, on the seventh day, Baal approached...

from Stories from Ancient Canaan, by Coogan & Smith

Well there are many many corrupted accounts of Creation just like there are over 200 corrupted accounts of the Noahic flood.

But know this, god went to great pains to tell us creation was six literal days and a seventh day when He rested.

Not only did He say evening and morning to make it clear, but in the giving of the TEn commandments He ordered the Sabbath because in six days God made everything and on the seventh He rested! It doesn't get any plainer than that.

 

[Wick Stick]

Well there are many many corrupted accounts of Creation just like there are over 200 corrupted accounts of the Noahic flood.

Sure... but I didn't make reference to one of those. The story above is about a man who prayed for a son.

But know this, god went to great pains to tell us creation was six literal days and a seventh day when He rested.

Not only did He say evening and morning to make it clear, but in the giving of the TEn commandments He ordered the Sabbath because in six days God made everything and on the seventh He rested! It doesn't get any plainer than that.

It's the 'evening and morning' that makes it unclear, tbh. That sort of repetition is used as a poetic device in other literature of the same time period and language. I'm repeating myself here, I guess, but it kinda seems like you didn't read the original post all the way through...

 

[keithr]

I don't see why those quotes would prevent Genesis 1 from using a poetic device to express the passage of time.

It seems that rather than address the argument I presented, you've decided to throw some unrelated verses at me.

I was responding to your statement "I don't think those time frames are literal", i.e. to the text which I had quoted in my post. By quoting the passages from Exodus it is clear that God claimed to have created the heavens and the earth in six days, where each day was a normal earth day (currently about 24 hours), i.e. in Genesis 1 it is referring to literal days and not a period of time that someone might choose so as to make it fit with man made theories about how the universe came to exist without the existence of a creator God. As Jesus once said (concerning the resurrection), "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matthew 22:29); man also thinks that humans evolved over millions of years, and yet God can restore to life and create spiritual bodies for millions of humans "in the twinkling of an eye". Never underestimate the power of God!

Consider also Genesis 1:1-5 (WEB):

(1) In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.​

(2) The earth was formless and empty. Darkness was on the surface of the deep and God’s Spirit was hovering over the surface of the waters.​

(3) God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.​

(4) God saw the light, and saw that it was good. God divided the light from the darkness.​

(5) God called the light “day”, and the darkness he called “night”. There was evening and there was morning, the first day.​

After having created the heavens and the earth (the whole universe) on the first day, on that same first day of the 6 days of creation God also created light on the earth, and He separated it into a period of darknes and a period of light; so presumably he caused the earth to spin so that there was night and day on the earth (perhaps he created the sun at that point too, it doesn't give a lot of detail). So because of that, for the first time on the earth there was a "day" and a "night", hence "There was evening and there was morning, the first day".

Note that God called the daylight "day" (Hebrew word yom), and the first day is defined as an "evening and morning", and that very first evening and morning was the very first "day" on earth.

KJV: (5) And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
GNB: (5) and he named the light "Day" and the darkness "Night." Evening passed and morning came—that was the first day.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

It's the 'evening and morning' that makes it unclear, tbh. That sort of repetition is used as a poetic device in other literature of the same time period and language. I'm repeating myself here, I guess, but it kinda seems like you didn't read the original post all the way through...

Well Moses made use of much poetic devices to helpo people memorize Scripture. It is doen in a sing son gfashion. We must remember that though Moses penned the Words, God is the autrhor and He wished to convey a clear message about creation- it was six days and on the seventh He rested.

This is reconfirmed in Ex. 20:11, Ex. 31:17. I do not think He was making a parable in any sense. He was speaking literally.

 

[Jack]

Genesis 1 enumerates 7 days for the creation. It painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next with the repetitive phrase, "and there was evening, and there was morning, the Xth Day."

I don't think those time frames are literal. Get out your torches and pitchforks.

A clear ATTACK on the Bible!

Just to be clear, I DO think the chapter is about the literal creation of the world. This isn't one of Aesop's fables.

Oh, you pick the parts you like!

But I read something recently that suggests to me that the enumeration of 7 days itself... that is probably a poetic device. What I read was a translation of another ancient story, named Aqhat. This story was engraved on stone around the time that Moses lived, and unearthed in Ugarit in modern days by archaeologists.

You should have stuck with reading the Bible.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
● Gen 1:5b . . And there was evening and there was morning, a first day.

There are two primary kinds of days in the first chapter of Genesis. One is a creation
day and the other is a natural day. It's very important to keep those two kinds of days
distinct and separate in our thinking because they are as unalike as sand and gravel.

Creation days are a bit problematic because there were no sunrises or sunsets to be
seen on Earth till the fourth day. And-- when you think about it --a strict chronology of
evening and morning defines neither a natural day nor a calendar day, rather, it defines
overnight; viz: darkness (Lev 24:2-4). In order to obtain a full 24-hour day, we'd have to
define creation's Days as a day and a night rather than an evening and a morning.

In other words: the evenings and mornings relative to creation days aren't solar events.
So it's very likely the terms are merely index flags indicating the beginnings and endings of
unspecified periods.

Now, according to Gen 1:24-31, God created humans and all terra critters on the sixth
day; which has to include prehistoric creatures because on no other day did God create
beasts but the sixth.

However; the sciences of geology and paleontology, in combination with radiometric
dating, strongly suggest that dinosaurs preceded humans by several million years. So
then, in my estimation, the days of creation should be taken to represent eras rather
than 24-hour events. That's not an unreasonable posit; for example:

"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in
the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven." (Gen 2:4)

The Hebrew word for "day" in that verse is the very same word for each of the six days
of God's creation labors. Since day in Gen 2:4 refers to a period of time obviously much
longer than a 24-hour calendar day; it defends the suggestion that each of the six Days
of creation were longer than 24 hours apiece too. In other words: day is ambiguous and
not all that easy to interpret sometimes.

Anyway; this "day" thing has been a stone in the shoe for just about everybody who
takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of
twenty-four hours apiece; so Bible readers end up stumped when trying to figure out
how to cope with the 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g.
Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the
mass extinction events.

NOTE: Galileo believed that science and religion are allies rather than enemies-- two
different languages telling the same story. He believed that science and religion
complement each other: science answers questions that religion doesn't bother to
answer, and religion answers questions that science cannot answer.

For example: theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking understood pretty well how the
cosmos works; but could never scientifically explain why it should exist at all. Well; in
my estimation, the only possible answer to the "why" is found in intelligent design; which
is a religious explanation rather than scientific. Religion's "why" is satisfactory for people
of faith. No doubt deep thinkers like Michio Kaku, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Michelle Thaller,
and the late Carl Sagan would prefer something a bit more empirical.
_

 

[keithr]

Anyway; this "day" thing has been a stone in the shoe for just about everybody who
takes Genesis seriously. It's typically assumed that the days of creation consisted of
twenty-four hours apiece; so Bible readers end up stumped when trying to figure out
how to cope with the 4.5 billion-year age of the earth, and factor in the various eras, e.g.
Triassic, Jurassic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Cretaceous, etc, plus the ice ages and the
mass extinction events.

You can either believe God or the changing theories of men. The latest scientific theories estimate the age of the universe to be no more than about 10,000 years old - much closer to what the Bible says. That is based on the realisation that the speed of light is not constant as the "experts" first claimed - it has been slowing down exponentially.

 

[Wick Stick]

A clear ATTACK on the Bible!

A suggestion that there's figurative language in one chapter is not an attack on the Bible. It's an attempt to understand it.

Oh, you pick the parts you like!

No, but I do evaluate each book or story for itself, rather than applying a single braindead rule to every chapter and verse.

You should have stuck with reading the Bible.

If all one ever reads is the Bible, then they won't have a very good understanding of what they're reading. You need literature and history and yes, even science to inform what you read.

 

[Jack]

A suggestion that there's figurative language in one chapter is not an attack on the Bible. It's an attempt to understand it.

"Figurative" = The Bible doesn't mean what it says!

No, but I do evaluate each book or story for itself, rather than applying a single braindead rule to every chapter and verse.

Braindead? You must be referring to WatchTower doctrine.

If all one ever reads is the Bible, then they won't have a very good understanding of what they're reading.

No wonder your reject and attack the Bible!

You need literature and history and yes, even science to inform what you read.

Go ahead and read your poisonous books that lead to Hell fire. I'll stick with Jesus, God of the Bible!

 

[Wick Stick]

Well Moses made use of much poetic devices to helpo people memorize Scripture. It is doen in a sing son gfashion. We must remember that though Moses penned the Words, God is the autrhor and He wished to convey a clear message about creation- it was six days and on the seventh He rested.

This is reconfirmed in Ex. 20:11, Ex. 31:17. I do not think He was making a parable in any sense. He was speaking literally.

I emphatically did NOT say it was a parable. Rather the opposite - I specifically said that it was about the literal creation.

The claim here is that the repetitive phrases and the progression over 7 days are a poetic device meant to show that time elapsed, but not necessarily how much time elapsed specifically.

 

[Webers_Home]

You can either believe God or yada, yada, yada.

I have no trouble believing God, rather, it's young-earth theorists like yourself
that I have trouble believing.
_

 

[Mark51]

Genesis 1 enumerates 7 days for the creation. It painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next with the repetitive phrase, "and there was evening, and there was morning, the Xth Day."

I don't think those time frames are literal. Get out your torches and pitchforks.

Just to be clear, I DO think the chapter is about the literal creation of the world. This isn't one of Aesop's fables.

But I read something recently that suggests to me that the enumeration of 7 days itself... that is probably a poetic device. What I read was a translation of another ancient story, named Aqhat. This story was engraved on stone around the time that Moses lived, and unearthed in Ugarit in modern days by archaeologists.

The story contains a section that looks very similar to Genesis 1's week of creation. I've included the sectoin at the bottom of this post so you can read it for yourself. As you do, take note of the progression over a period of 7 days, and of the repetitive language that painstakingly documents the shift from one day to the next. The main character dresses, goes to offer sacrifices to the gods, praying that he might conceive a son, and then undresses, goes to bed, gets up the next day and repeats it all again.

It seems that this repetition over a period of 7 days is a literary form. It expresses the passage of time - of a long time. The repetition causes the reader/hearer of the story to experience the passage of time. If you read below, you will suffer alongside the main character as he waits and persists in petitioning the gods for a son. You might be happy to know that he is granted his request.

Then Danel, the man of Rapau,

the Hero, the man of the Harnamite,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

He cast off his cloak and lay down,

put off his garment and spent the night​

One day passed, and on the second

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

A third day passed, and on the fourth

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

A fifth day passed, and on the sixth

girded, Daniel gave to the gods,​

girded, he gave the gods food,

girded, he gave the holy ones drink.​

Danel cast off his cloak and lay down,

cast off his cloak and lay down,​

put off his garment and spent the night.​

Then, on the seventh day, Baal approached...

from Stories from Ancient Canaan, by Coogan & Smith

Yes, the repetitive phase you mentioned is a descriptive division between the end of the first through sixth creative days. However, this repetitive phase is not repeated at the end of the seventh day because this seventh day did not come to a completion. Genesis 2:7; Hebrews 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3-6, 8-11.​

Furthermore, the time periods for each day were not “literal.” The verses mention in Hebrews clearly show that that seventh day has not come to a completion and is several thousand in length-at this point in time.​

Consider this: The scientific community overwhelming agrees that dinosaurs, for example, lived and died millions of years ago. Such beasts and animals were created at the beginning of the sixth day (Genesis 1:24). Later, during this same sixth day, man was created.-Genesis 1:27. The period of time from the end of the fifth day to the beginning of the seventh day was millions of years in length.​

 

[Wick Stick]

Yes, the repetitive phase you mentioned is a descriptive division between the end of the first through sixth creative days. However, this repetitive phase is not repeated at the end of the seventh day because this seventh day did not come to a completion. Genesis 2:7; Hebrews 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3-6, 8-11.​

Furthermore, the time periods for each day were not “literal.” The verses mention in Hebrews clearly show that that seventh day has not come to a completion and is several thousand in length-at this point in time.​

Consider this: The scientific community overwhelming agrees that dinosaurs, for example, lived and died millions of years ago. Such beasts and animals were created at the beginning of the sixth day (Genesis 1:24). Later, during this same sixth day, man was created.-Genesis 1:27. The period of time from the end of the fifth day to the beginning of the seventh day was millions of years in length.​

The idea in the OP is that the days are a poetic device. This isn't the day-age theory.

It's the entire week that stands for some long indeterminate period.

 

[keithr]

Yes, the repetitive phase you mentioned is a descriptive division between the end of the first through sixth creative days. However, this repetitive phase is not repeated at the end of the seventh day because this seventh day did not come to a completion. Genesis 2:7; Hebrews 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3-6, 8-11.

What has Genesis 2:7 got to do with the seventh day? Genesis 2:7 (WEB):

(7) Yahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.​

Furthermore, the time periods for each day were not “literal.” The verses mention in Hebrews clearly show that that seventh day has not come to a completion and is several thousand in length-at this point in time.​

What it says in Genesis about the seventh day is:

Genesis 2:1-3 (WEB):

(1) The heavens, the earth, and all their vast array were finished.​

(2) On the seventh day God finished his work which he had done; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done.​

(3) God blessed the seventh day, and made it holy, because he rested in it from all his work of creation which he had done.​

It simply says that God rested on the seventh day; it doesn't say that the seventh day never ended. God started his rest on the seventh day, i.e. He had finished His work on the sixth day, and He continues to rest from His work of creation, but that doesn't mean that the length of a day changed at that time, that there was never an eighth day and that we've all been living in just one day!

Hebrews 3 (WEB):

(11) as I swore in my wrath, ‘They will not enter into my rest.’”​

(19) We see that they were not able to enter in because of unbelief.​

The rest that Paul is referring to is the rest that God had promised to men if they would obey Him, and in particular to the rest in heaven promised to the Christians he was writing to. Barnes' Notes on Hebrew 3:11 says:

It is called “my rest” here, meaning that it was such rest as God had provided, or such as he enjoyed. The particular “rest” referred to here was that of the land of Canaan, but which was undoubtedly regarded as emblematic of the “rest” in heaven. Into that rest God solemnly said they should never enter. They had been rebellious. All the means of reclaiming them had failed. God had warned and entreated them; he had caused his mercies to pass before them, and had visited them with judgments in vain; and he now declares that for all their rebellion they should be excluded from the promised land. God speaks here in the manner of human beings. Men are affected with feelings of indignation in such circumstances, and God makes use of such language as expresses such feelings. But we are to understand it in a manner consistent with his character, and we are not to suppose that he is affected with the same emotions which agitate the bosoms of people. The meaning is, that he formed and expressed a deliberate and solemn purpose that they should never enter into the promised land. Whether this “rest” refers here to heaven, and whether the meaning is that God would exclude them from that blessed world, will be more appropriately considered in the next chapter. The particular idea is, that they were to be excluded from the promised land, and that they should fall in the wilderness. No one can doubt, also, that their conduct had been such as to show that the great body of them were unfit to enter into heaven.​

Barnes' Notes on Hebrew 4:4 ("For he has said this somewhere about the seventh day, “God rested on the seventh day from all his works;”") says:

For he spake - Gen_2:2. “And God did rest.” “At the close of the work of creation he rested. The work was done. “That” was the rest of God. He was happy in the contemplation of his own works; and he instituted that day to be observed as a memorial of “his” resting from his works, and as a “type” of the eternal rest which remained for man.” The idea is this, that the notion of “rest” of some kind runs through all dispensations. It was seen in the finishing of the work of creation; seen in the appointment of the Sabbath; seen in the offer of the promised land, and is seen now in the promise of heaven. All dispensations contemplate “rest,” and there must be such a prospect before man now. When it is said that “God did rest,” of course it does not mean that he was wearied with his toil, but merely that he “ceased” from the stupendous work of creation. He no more put forth creative energy, but calmly contemplated his own works in their beauty and grandeur; Gen_1:31. In carrying forward the great affairs of the universe, he always has been actively employed - John 5:17 [But Jesus answered them, “My Father is still working, so I am working, too.”], but he is not employed in the work of “creation” properly so called. That is done; and the sublime cessation from that constitutes the “rest of God.”​

Consider this: The scientific community overwhelming agrees that dinosaurs, for example, lived and died millions of years ago. Such beasts and animals were created at the beginning of the sixth day (Genesis 1:24). Later, during this same sixth day, man was created.-Genesis 1:27. The period of time from the end of the fifth day to the beginning of the seventh day was millions of years in length.​

You're believing the theories of men and forcing God's word to fit in with that, rather than believing God. The "community" that guesses at the date of creation of animals and plants, and theorises that they were created millions of years ago, have not been very scientific and they have got it wrong! The more "scientific" evidence, such as the slowing speed of light and our modern uderstanding of genetics, prove those old theories to be wrong.

Exodus 20:9-11 (WEB):

(9) You shall labor six days, and do all your work,​

(10) but the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yahweh your God. You shall not do any work in it, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your livestock, nor your stranger who is within your gates;​

(11) for in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore Yahweh blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy.​

 

[Webers_Home]

.
● Gen 1:9 . . 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.

At this point, the Earth's surface likely resembled the topography of a billiard
ball so it would remain entirely flooded were it not reshaped.

"He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved. You
covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the
mountains. At your rebuke they fled; at the sound of your thunder they took
to flight. The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place that you
appointed for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they
might not again cover the earth." (Ps 104:5-9)

That passage is stunning; and clearly way ahead of its time. Mountains
rising, and valleys sinking speaks of magma pressure and tectonic plate
subduction-- powerful forces of nature that keep the Earth's surface in a
perpetual state of alteration.

Now, it's right about here that Young-Earth theorists have a problem
because it's obvious from physical evidence that much of the Earth's higher
elevations were inundated for a very long time before they were pushed up
to where they are now.

Take for example Mount Everest. Today its tippy top is something like
29,029 feet above sea level. The discovery of fossilized sea lilies near its
summit proves that the Himalayan land mass has not always been
mountainous; but at one time was the floor of an ancient sea bed. This is
confirmed by the "yellow band" below Everest's summit consisting of
limestone: a type of rock made from calcite sediments containing the
skeletal remains of countless trillions of organisms who lived, not on dry
land, rather, underwater in an ocean.
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.
FAQ: Young-Earth theorists calculate planet Earth is no more than +/- 6,000
years old. They get that number by working with the Bible's genealogies
beginning with Adam and his son Seth, and from taking into account
portions of world history. Why do Old-Earth theorists dispute their
results?

REPLY: We cannot know for a rock-solid, bullet-proof, verifiable certainty
that the days of creation were no more than twenty-four hours apiece. In
other words: it's very possible that those 6,000 years are merely a drop of
pigment in a bucket of paint.
_