Bible Study Does the Bible communicate a young age of the Earth, Yes or No?

[chessman]

"... the fact that some dont take it literally undermines the rest of scripture especially salvation. If Genesis is not understood as factual and literal as though it really happened then according to your line of thinking salvation was not necessary beacause the sin in the garden of eden was merely symbolic and should not be taken as literal. Why should someone beleive in salvation or the need for it if "sin" is merely symbolic? Why should someone beleive in the rest of scripture why cant it all be symbolic? God used a literal 6 day creation, it says what it says, the real question is do you beleive it?

Stone Yarder, I'm not sure who the "some" are here that you are referenceing since some of the off-topic posts have been deleted and you didn't quote any particular point. But let's just say someone felt exactly like you do about the age of the Earth and the Bible text and tat every word of the Bible is true and the creation days were "literal", etc. with two exceptions as follows:

1. He just felt that in these historical accounts of the Bible (the genealogies), that "begat" could mean a further down the line generation than first generation (yet still accuarte/literal. (which is a Biblical fact)
2. Yom can mean longer than 24 hours. (which is also a Biblical fact)

Now just exactly how does that mean the person preach's a different salvation/gospel?

 

[Sparkey]

You've not presented any "evidence" , however, that refutes the ESV, NIV or AMP scholars statement that in Hebrew "son" cannot mean a distant relative. Especially since it's right there used Jesus, "son of David". Additionally, it is the age of the Earth thAt is the question, not Adam.

The Genealogy of Adam to Noah does apply. It sets the time-frame for the period of years that past (and duration of time between Adam and Noah) at 1056 years and thereby gives us sequences of events that lead up to Noah and places the flood within Noah's lifespan.

• Regarding scholarly opinions: We've gone over the issue that you've raised in prior posts. I've stated that merely "name-dropping" does not a doctrine make. Let's agree to try not to simply repeat ourselves at every opportunity.

Question: Have you found supportive statements from the experts that you can point to regarding the Genesis 5 genealogy? I'd like to see them, if you have.​

• My observation: Reference to expert testimony (giving general statements) may be used but we can't conclude anything about Gen 5 seeing as the experts didn't say anything about it.

I'm gonna pause to let that sink in and quote a supportive interjection:

Well, I can't post much anywhere without sparking debate. Then I'm left defending myself, but such is the nature of the subject matter. While we need... to be able to have honest discussions, we [also] need to emphasize mutual compassion & understanding for alternate and opposing views so that people won't be afraid to express themselves [and so they] don't feel threatened for it.

For example, my views do not need to be accepted by anyone else for me to hold them, but at the same time they are open for challenge, as long as there is an attempt to be understood & not just attacked or [descriptive term omitted], by someone opposed

So then, having already agreed to the conduct necessary for this forum, and continuing to look at Scripture while taking necessary steps to avoid debate, we turn to a quick summary of Genesis 5:

"After all, “years” and “total lifetimes” are present in the Genesis 5 text and should be seen as historically accurate.

I have no fear of contradiction when I state that there are 1056 years between the time of Adam to Noah. I will not make that exact same statement for Genesis, chapter 11. There is some evidence of controversy that I've found about that particular genealogy which I have no problem presenting upon request.
For future reference, I plan on introducing "provisos" to that discussion should it be seen that we need to go there.

But before we actually do go to Genesis, chapter 11, let the reader take note: I've subtly changed the topic that is often discussed. Instead of trying to figure out when Adam was created and assigning a specific date (an arduous task), I'm merely trying to figure out the duration of the time that past between Adam and Noah.

There are no Scriptural clues or sleuthing evidence that I've been able to find to challenge my assertion of 1056 years as the only answer to this specific question. The common complaint of "telescoping" does not apply to Genesis 5; it is conjecture only, and when that conjecture is weighted against Scriptural support found in the first chapter of the Chronicles (see 1Chr 1:1-3,4), and also found in the NT (see Luke 3:36-37,38 and count the generations between Adam and Noah for yourself ), can be dismissed as such. (See also Jude 1:14)

... still wrapping up regarding Genesis 5 with concluding thoughts about
Telescoping that we have noticed:

Matthew chapter 1 starts with the declaration, "Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham," which could be cited as an example of "telescoping" IF IT DID NOT GO ON to give the specific details of the linage tracing the Christ through his adoptive parent Joseph and showing his legal right to sit in the throne of David. It does not mention Adam through Noah, and can not be used as a Scriptural challenge to Genesis 5 (kindly correct me if I am wrong about this, but before any do, please see Matthew's summary statement in Mat 1:17, "Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.").

Before we conclude examination for Scriptural evidence about Genesis 5, we need to look at the other NT genealogy found in Luke which traces back through Mary. Let's do so quickly as we table this discussion. It starts with another example of "telescoping," from God in Heaven to Jesus, the Christ:

And as he was praying, heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

New International Version (NIV)
Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

It continues tracing back (through Mary, this time) and thoughtful readers may conclude with me that another example of powerful, supportive evidence may be seen for Genesis 5.

the son of Shem,

the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,

37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,

the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,

the son of Kenan, 38 the son of Enosh,

the son of Seth, the son of Adam,

the son of God.

This does not replicate the year count of Genesis 5, but instead supports the allegation of the Lord, that the Christ is His only begotten son. We can see that elsewhere in the Biblical accounting including the first chapter of scholarly Luke himself.

Other Scriptures of Note:

Gen 6:3 God said to Noah, "My spirit will not always strive with man for he is flesh yet his days will be 120"

Some say that means the flood was 120 years after God said that to Noah - there is no biblical evidence for this.

Some say that men will live 120 years in their lifetime - The ONE man who coincidentally lived exactly 120 years was Moses, who may have been quoted in Psalm 90:

A prayer of Moses the man of God.

1 Lord, you have been our dwelling place
throughout all generations.
2 Before the mountains were born
or you brought forth the whole world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
3 You turn people back to dust,
saying, “Return to dust, you mortals.”
4 A thousand years in your sight
are like a day that has just gone by,
or like a watch in the night.
5 Yet you sweep people away in the sleep of death—
they are like the new grass of the morning:
6 In the morning it springs up new,
but by evening it is dry and withered.
7 We are consumed by your anger
and terrified by your indignation.
8 You have set our iniquities before you,
our secret sins in the light of your presence.
9 All our days pass away under your wrath;
we finish our years with a moan.
10 Our days may come to seventy years,
or eighty, if our strength endures;
yet the best of them are but trouble and sorrow,
for they quickly pass, and we fly away.
11 If only we knew the power of your anger!
Your wrath is as great as the fear that is your due.
12 Teach us to number our days,
that we may gain a heart of wisdom.
13 Relent, Lord! How long will it be?
Have compassion on your servants.
14 Satisfy us in the morning with your unfailing love,
that we may sing for joy and be glad all our days.
15 Make us glad for as many days as you have afflicted us,
for as many years as we have seen trouble.
16 May your deeds be shown to your servants,
your splendor to their children.
17 May the favor[a] of the Lord our God rest on us;
establish the work of our hands for us—
yes, establish the work of our hands.

This discussion isn't about the average lifespans of man, no. But we can clearly see that some things have changed from then to now. In the time between Adam and Noah (before the flood) men lived longer. Other differences can be noticed from the Bible about the time spent in the Garden of Eden before the Fall of Man. The time period (from Adam to Noah) didn't last forever, didn't last 10,000 years, no. It did not last 30,000 years either. It lasted 1056 years.

Still awaiting criticism(s) backed up by specific expert testimony (if it exists),
Sparrowhawke

 

[westtexas]

Yom can mean longer than 24 hours. (which is also a Biblical fact)

This is a true statement in a few instances but Genesis 1 is quite clear and sets each "yom" within a set timeframe. 1:5 scripture says "evening and morning"-echad yom (day one). 1:8 scripture says "evening and morning"-sheni yom (day 2). 1:13 scripture says "evening and morning"- shelishi yom (day 3). etc. etc.

 

[chessman]

Looking forward to your thoughts.

Various Scriptures “highly†consistent with the Big Bang event of creation (and I’m not saying any are not consistent with a YEC view either):
1. Gen 1:1 (ESV) In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
2. John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
a. The Big Bang singularity requirement meshes with this description perfectly.
b. I’m not saying YEC cannot make the same case. It’s just within the BB model we can show it mathematically is true.
3. Romans 1:19-20 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.</SPAN> 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.
a. God, being outside this universe cannot be fully known. Only what He “shows†to us within this universe.
b. Again, just as true on a YEC view.
4. Colossians 1:16-17 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.</SPAN> 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
5. Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.</SPAN>
6. Isaiah 46:9-11
remember the former things of old;
for I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me,
10 declaring the end from the beginning
and from ancient times things not yet done,
saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,
and I will accomplish all my purpose,’
calling a bird of prey from the east,
the man of my counsel from a far country.
I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass;
I have purposed, and I will do it.
7. Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created,
in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.
8. Psalm 148:6 And he established them forever and ever;</SPAN> he gave a decree, and it shall not pass away.
9. Romans 8:22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.</SPAN>
a. All these passage are true either on a YEC or an OEC view. I’m not arguing that they aren’t.
b. The point is, if “the heavens and the earth†basically equates to everything (the universe), then the universe had a beginning. Time itself had a beginning, which is a truism proven mathematically within the BB model/equations.
c. The Bible is talking about creation of all matter, energy, space and time from nothing. So is the Big Bang.
d. But on the OEC view, and using the constant laws of God’s physics, we can show a beginning of all “thingsâ€, even time. I don’t think a Hebrew person living prior to the 1st century would understand that “all things†meant all matter, energy, space and time of the entire universe. But it did! By using the BB equations, we just know a little more about this truth that’s always existed.

 

[westtexas]

Point Blank now: Show me from Scripture where I am wrong in my statements that the number of years between Adam and Noah total to a sum of precisely 1056 years.

• Adam-Seth 130 years
• Seth-Enosh 105 Years
• Enosh-Kenan 90 Years
• Kenan-Mahalalel 70 Years
• Mahalalel-Jared 65 Years
• Jared-Enoch 162 Years
• Enoch-Methuselah 65 Years
• Methuselah-Lamech 187 Years
• Lamech-Noah 182 Years

I missed your answer to Sparrow"s question. Sparrow has quoted Genesis 5:3,6,9,12,15,18,21,25, 28,29

 

[Sparkey]

Wait, chessman? Help me here. Am I confused? It has happened in the past.


I read your first post again and noticed you saying, "But the Bible doesn’t total the 1,243 years from Adam’s birth to Noah’s birth."
Seems like I may have missed something. checking... (one moment please).
I'm getting ready to make a retraction, feel free to help me if you like.

~Sparrow

 

[chessman]

I missed your answer to Sparrow"s question. Sparrow has quoted Genesis 5:3,6,9,12,15,18,21,25, 28,29

I missed your answer to Sparrow"s question. Sparrow has quoted Genesis 5:3,6,9,12,15,18,21,25, 28,29

I've spent about 2 hours trying to comprehensively address (or re-address as the case may be) all of Sparrow’s topics/questions. I’m not finished just yet.
But basically, this might help both of you:
1. It’s not my opinion that the genealogies are bogus or non-literal in any way. I hold to every word of the Bible’s inerrancy in what it originally communicated to its readers.
2. It is my opinion, however, that some of the “generations” (within either Gen 5 or Gen 11 or both) are telescoped in that the “begat a son” really means “ X begat a descendant who’s name was Y” . For holding this position, I’ve offered a few evidences but not completely listed them thinking it unnecessary if others could agree to the NIV, ESV, etc. summary statements.
3. Where, exactly they are telescoped this way, I don’t know for sure. If I did know for sure, there wouldn’t be any questions about them.
4. There are clear indications they’ve been telescoped, however, as pointed out by the ESV, NIV and AMP (at least) plus other OT Hebrew scholars. Why would they say it if there wasn’t evidence?
5. However, in no way is it my position that “millions” of years are depicted in these genealogies. I don’t think Adam lived millions of years ago. But I do think it was more than 6,000 years ago, yes.

 

[chessman]

This is a true statement in a few instances but Genesis 1 is quite clear and sets each "yom" within a set timeframe. 1:5 scripture says "evening and morning"-echad yom (day one). 1:8 scripture says "evening and morning"-sheni yom (day 2). 1:13 scripture says "evening and morning"- shelishi yom (day 3). etc. etc.

1. Each “yom†is set within a timeframe.
a. I actually agree because that’s within the allowable definition(s) of Yom. But the question is what is the time frame? Why 24 hours? I believe it’s longer than 24 hours.
2. You assert that the text sets each of these time frames as 24 hours because “evening and morning†are used in the narrative.
I disagree for the following reasons:

i. Why even assert this “rule†in the first place? What’s the motivation for determining it’s time period?
ii. There are indications in other Scriptures that this “rule†isn’t a rule after all.
iii. Yom is used right there in Gen 2:4, for example, to clearly mean a time period greater than 24 hours. Other examples such as Zech 14 14:7-8, Psalm 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8 (not that it’s a conversion factor or anything) also exist that seem to preclude this assertion.
iv. Yom is actually defined as “lightâ€, not a 24 hour period in Gen 1:3, so why then make it mean “24 hoursâ€? Seems to have flexibility, scripturally.
​

b. What mechanism would have regulated a “24 hour rule� Rotation of the Earth in proximity to a Sun or another light source? Why 24 hour’s rotation or on/off cycling of another light source?

i. If there was another light source, shouldn’t it have been mentioned?
ii. In Alaska during the winter, the sun never does set, so if the subject is the Earth (prior to Adam and the Garden) then, what makes it 24 hours?
​

 

[Sparkey]

I've spent about 2 hours trying to comprehensively address (or re-address as the case may be) all of Sparrow’s topics/questions. I’m not finished just yet.
But basically, this might help both of you:
1. It’s not my opinion that the genealogies are bogus or non-literal in any way. I hold to every word of the Bible’s inerrancy in what it originally communicated to its readers.
2. It is my opinion, however, that some of the “generations” (within either Gen 5 or Gen 11 or both) are telescoped in that the “begat a son” really means “ X begat a descendant who’s name was Y” . For holding this position, I’ve offered a few evidences but not completely listed them thinking it unnecessary if others could agree to the NIV, ESV, etc. summary statements.
3. Where, exactly they are telescoped [?]this way[?] I don’t know for sure. If I did know for sure, there wouldn’t be any questions about them.
4. There are clear indications they’ve been telescoped, however, as pointed out by the ESV, NIV and AMP (at least) plus other OT Hebrew scholars. Why would they say it if there wasn’t evidence?
5. However, in no way is it my position that “millions” of years are depicted in these genealogies. I don’t think Adam lived millions of years ago. But I do think it was more than 6,000 years ago, yes.

Thank you, chessman. Seems that your findings and mine are in agreement. I would challenge your statement #4 (posed as a question) because neither I, nor you may speak to why "they" did something. In point-of-fact, I have not seen any attempt to fiddle with Genesis 5, from Adam to Noah. Repeating myself (as it seems is my habit these days) regarding the time between Noah and Adam only I've not been able to find anybody (expert or otherwise) that can cast dispersion toward the sum of the ages being 1056. Let's agree at some future point that you are able to say the same thing, of course you can not be expected to check every single source out there, but if you have found any, let us know, please?

After that time and while going toward Abram, there are experts who have given results of their analysis suggesting there may be one (1) discrepancy (as an example of possible telescoping). I won't try to steal your thunder and give his name here but that one example only gives room to the argument about the Genesis 11 chronology. I'm okay with that. Introducing a +/- factor of a generation or two when people were living less than 120 years will not effect the total time calculation as much as introducing one (or more) when people lived longer (before the flood).

Your thoughts? Well, I mean, your thoughts other than the oft repeated one about ALL "Hebrew" genealogies are telescoped, please? We are narrowing in on the crux of the matter. The often debated term "day" that is sometimes transliterated into English as either "yom" or "yowm". I should expect that once we have eliminated all the chances of H U G E gaps in Gen 5 (thousands of years), and pointed toward a possible tiny gap (hundreds of years) in Gen 11, we change the focus (and tone) of the thread to conform with your noble purpose. As I've said, I'm comfortable with a +/- factor of two generations averaging out at 120 years each.

 

[westtexas]

1. Each “yom” is set within a timeframe.
a. I actually agree because that’s within the allowable definition(s) of Yom. But the question is what is the time frame? Why 24 hours? I believe it’s longer than 24 hours.
2. You assert that the text sets each of these time frames as 24 hours because “evening and morning” are used in the narrative.
I disagree for the following reasons:

Your disagreements didn't mean much. I agree that there are instances in Scripture where "yom" can mean more than a 24 hour period which you showed quite well. This is not the case in Genesis 1 though. The "yom" in Genesis 1 is set within a timeframe of "evening and morning" by Scripture. I did a little quick research (the internet is a wonderful thing ). "Evening and morning" are used together in Scripture 38 times and ALWAYS denote a 24 hour period. Ex. 18:13,14 Ex.27:21 Ruth 3:13 are a couple examples.
Yom +evening or yom+morning are used together in Scripture 23 times (Ex. 19:16) and ALWAYS denote a 24 hour period.

I challenge you to show me 1 example of "yom" being used in conjunction with evening or morning and having a different meaning than a literal 24 hour period.

 

[westtexas]

Repeating myself (as it seems is my habit these days) regarding the time between Noah and Adam only I've not been able to find anybody (expert or otherwise) that can cast dispersion toward the sum of the ages being 1056. Let's agree at some future point that you are able to say the same thing, of course you can not be expected to check every single source out there, but if you have found any, let us know, please?

Sparrow, let me hear your thoughts. I don't believe anyone is going to show evidence of telescoping in Genesis 5 but even if there was Genesis 5:3 could read Adam>Chessman>Sparrow>Westtexas>Seth=130 years ( I'm doing the writing so I get to be the youngest) and it wouldn"t make any difference in the math. Even with telescoping generations inserted Scripture says 130 years from Adam to Seth.

Regardless how many generations are inserted, anybody with a calculator, will come up with an answer of 1056 years from Adam to Noah. Thoughts?

 

[felix]

Bible does speak of a old earth but the creation of life is very recent. This is because, the first 4 days are defined without the creation of Sun. Hence, the count of a day approx to 24 hrs begins only when the Sun began to rule the day i.e, 5th and 6th days - not the first 4 days.

 

[Sparkey]

Sparrow, let me hear your thoughts. I don't believe anyone is going to show evidence of telescoping in Genesis 5 but even if there was Genesis 5:3 could read Adam>Chessman>Sparrow>Westtexas>Seth=130 years ( I'm doing the writing so I get to be the youngest) and it wouldn"t make any difference in the math. Even with telescoping generations inserted Scripture says 130 years from Adam to Seth.

Regardless how many generations are inserted, anybody with a calculator, will come up with an answer of 1056 years from Adam to Noah. Thoughts?

I can't argue with that common sense approach. It's like saying, take what the Scripture means at face value. But even though I can't, others may. Some of those others are considered expert in their fields. Part of the thought (behind the thought) is that when we enter into the subject of "Relatively Young vs. Relatively Old Earth," we are entering into an Age-Old debate. Much of that debate deals with the expertise of others and should be avoided while we strive to study the Word of God.

Still, the conversation is more than a couple centuries old and we're not serving ourselves well if we do not even acknowledge the thoughts of others who have gone before us. The meat, the real "meat" of the discussion remains. It centers on the meaning(s) of the word that is transliterated into English as "yom" and/or "yowm," and translated "Day". In the spirit of BIBLE STUDY, what I'd like to see (both as Moderator and Member) is a highly focused effort of Berean (Acts 17:11) inspired (noble proof of what others say) discussion. Much effort has gone toward this and it deserves recognition here. This Scripture, combined with 1Tim 6:20 forms the basis for what I'm pushing to see implemented on our forums.

Thank you for your observation, it is like a "knife" that can be used to trim the fat. The question remains, will we use it for that purpose? Going from "Milk" to "Meat" means learning how to use our utensils well.

 

[chessman]

The meat, the real "meat" of the discussion remains. It centers on the meaning(s) of the word that is transliterated into English as "yom" and/or "yowm," and translated "Day".

I totally agree. I'm preparing some material on that very nature. BTW, if anyone is of the leading, pray for my family. We lost a loved one to death last night (our pet) and my girls are not taking it easy as to be expected. Death stinks! Only Christ overcame death. Regardless of the actual age of the earth, debate or even bible study. Life thru Christ is what matters.

 

[Sparkey]

BTW, if anyone is of the leading, pray for my family. We lost a loved one to death last night (our pet) and my girls are not taking it easy as to be expected. Death stinks! Only Christ overcame death. Regardless of the actual age of the earth, debate or even bible study. Life thru Christ is what matters.

Amen, and yes. You and your loved ones are in our prayers.

 

[chessman]

… I agree that there are instances in Scripture where "yom" can mean more than a 24 hour period which you showed quite well. This is not the case in Genesis 1 though. The "yom" in Genesis 1 is set within a timeframe of "evening and morning" by Scripture.

Westexas, you have a gift for getting directly to the heart of the matter. That’s great. These two issues (Hebrew genealogy gaps (or lack of gaps) and the proper translation of Yom, evening and morning into English is the heart of the matter, in my opinion. These two issues are also why this thread is about Bible Study and not debate. Surely all of us Christians can agree that what the text actually said is the truth, no matter our opinions. Our interpretations of the text, on the other-hand, might cause some disagreements especially when the passages are difficult. Like does the Bible teach a flat earth or that the Sun revolves around the Earth. You know what, that's okay as long as it's not essential doctrine. We shouldn't preach that the age of the Earth is essential doctrine, either. There is always a danger of believing the text is saying more than it really was to the Hebrew people and there’s a danger of believing it meant less to them that it really did. So here’s some further clarification/study of the actual text within Gen 1 and the rest of the Scripture:
You say, “The "yom" in Genesis 1 is set within a timeframe of "evening and morning" by Scripture.”
Actually that’s technically not correct. I know what you mean but bear with me a minute and I will address both what you said and what you mean. It’s an important point. Within the Hebrew Genesis 1 narrative, the phrase you are referring to as “evening and morning” is actually most accurately translated “and there was evening and there was morning” not “evening and morning” but I know what you meant. The reason I say “technically not correct” is the word “Yowm” (Day) does not appear within either of these phrases, however. To me, this is a key evidence that something’s up with trying to turn this phrase into a narrative of literal events. More on this line of reasoning later.

1. Obviously day, evening nor morning appear in the original Hebrew text. I’m not being condescending to you or anyone reading this post but rather making a fundamental point. A point, I hope all Christians can agree to. “Day”, “evening” and “morning” are all English words translated from the original transliterated Hebrew words (Yowm, `ereb, and Boger). I’m not even going to attempt to post Hebrew letters. Using the context of the passage itself and how these words are used elsewhere in Scripture is the proper means to determine the real intended communication since there are a range of perfectly acceptable/possible ones below. Just as we do with the English version, by the way. I can say, “One day I’m going to learn Hebrew and you get the point that I’m not going to learn it in 24 hours. I recognize this doesn’t address the issue you raise when you put all the words together (more on this later), but the methodology should be the same.
2. The phrase you put in quotes “evening and morning” or “`ereb and boger” is not in the text of Genesis 1.
3. In fact the phrase recorded in the original Hebrew for the Creation Days is a very unique word order (phrase) as it appears nowhere else in all of Scripture exactly like it does in Genesis. Which to me is evidence that you cannot make a valid claim as to it’s “allowable” usage based on other similar phrases. There are no similar phrases, ordinals included or not to compare it to. Only the words themselves, in different order, and under different contexts are used elsewhere.
​

(Day) Yowm or Yom: NAS Word Usage - Total: 2247 with the following list of acceptable meanings:
Definition: day, time, year
1. day (as opposed to night)
2. day (24 hour period) [the one you are assuming in Genesis 1, but have agreed is not used this way in Gen 2 and elsewhere in Scripture, Why here?]
3. as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1 [I assume that Brown, Driver, Briggs and Gesenius (from which I get these definitions) lists this meaning separately from 24 hour period to simply avoid any conflict/debate i.e. they are neutral on whether it’s used in Genesis 1 to mean 24 hours or one of the other 11 allowable meanings such as the next one]
4. as a division of time [the one I believe is most accurate in Genesis 1, why think otherwise?]
5. a working day, a day's journey
6. days, lifetime (pl.)
7. time, period (general)
8. year
9. temporal references
10. today
11. yesterday
12. tomorrow

I did a little quick research (the internet is a wonderful thing ).

Yes or it can be a terrible thing also (porn or mis-information).

"Evening and morning" are used together in Scripture 38 times and ALWAYS denote a 24 hour period. Ex. 18:13,14 Ex.27:21 Ruth 3:13 are a couple examples.

Yom +evening or yom+morning are used together in Scripture 23 times (Ex. 19:16) and ALWAYS denote a 24 hour period.

I’ve done study on this as well, not just relying on what other people tell me. It’s time consuming and rather difficult because of the fact that when you do word searches for a phrase or even an individual word in the English, you are in fact searching translations, not the original. That’s why it’s better to search out the actual Hebrew words (all 2,247 in the case of Yowm), then do comparisons, ensuring context to context. Also, I wouldn’t believe everything you read on the internet about there being “38 times” where “evening and morning” are used together and it “always is 24 hours”. For these reasons:

1st, as I said, that’s not even the exact phrase used in Genesis 1.

2nd, what does “together” mean? The original text didn’t have verse numbers. If you exclude texts that are not in that particular “verse” but rather preceding it or following it (yet still in context), then you may very well be missing something.

3rd, the exact phrase of Genesis 1 is never used exactly like that way anywhere else.

4th, This conclusion (Yowm always means 24 hours when used with evening or morning), even ignoring 1-3 above is wrong, yet often quoted.

5th, why is there motivation to prove a 24 hour period in the first place? It’s just as miraculous that God created in longer than 24 hours as it is that He created in 24 hours or less. I truly don’t see the motivation since either meaning of Yown (long, 24 hours, or shorter) is so Biblically proven. Yes, I know that the Creation Week is a model for the Sabbath week. But it’s just that, a model. It’s not necessary for God to provide the typology for the Sabbath week using 24 hours per day. It wasn’t necessary for the Sabbath Years, either, by the way.
​

I challenge you to show me 1 example of "yom" being used in conjunction with evening or morning and having a different meaning than a literal 24 hour period.

Before I accept your challenge please just think of a couple of rhetorical questions. If I showed you one, would you change your mind? Why couldn’t Genesis 1 be the only example of where Yowm means more than 24 hours in conjunction with evening and morning? So what if it were the only example. Trinity is not even in the Bible, but we hold to that doctrine. But anyway, here goes:

“You will flee by the valley of My mountains, for the valley of the mountains will reach to Azel ; yes, you will flee just as you fled before the earthquake in the days [Yowm] of Uzziah king of Judah. [here the word is Yowm, yet translated plural as Yowm’s (that option doesn’t exist in the Hebrew which is why the text has “many Yowm” in the below example) as it’s obvious from the context that’s what God meant] Then the LORD, my God, will come, and all the holy ones with Him! In that day [here Ywom may or may not mean 24 hours, ironically] there will be no light ; the luminaries will dwindle. For it will be a unique day which is known to the LORD, neither day nor night, but it will come about that at eveningtime there will be light. And in that day 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.
​

Or maybe you meant an even harder “challenge” in that Yowm “has to be” concurrent with evening and morning instead of or?

"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."
​

Yes, I know that Yowm is translated plural in the English. Guess what? It’s not in the Hebrew. So why aren’t the “Days” made plural in Genesis 1 like they are here? A reasonable question! My opinion is that it's actually more acurate to the way God did it (not in 24 hours each, but in a definite long period of time each “day”, then moving on to the next “long period of time”). It was meant, I believe, to correct what the Egyptian people had “preached” erroneously to Moses’ people for 400+ years. That god (Ra-sun) rose each day to create the light to fight off the night, only to have to turn around and do it all over again. God’s true Creation story is a discrete sequence of creation events (that by the way couldn’t have been guessed accurately in 1,500 B.C, yet we see now proven via nature).

I have a question for you. On what day did God create Earth?

 

[Sparkey]

Of the more than 2,000 uses of the word, 95% mean a single day without question. That leaves 5% that clearly don't mean a single day or at least there is some question about it. When we eliminate the references to "The Day of the Lord," the number is reduced substantially.

In previous posts, we've discussed the unique character of the Genesis 5 genealogy/chronology documenting the number of years that past between Adam and Noah. The use of the word "day" in Gen 1 is also unique. The evening and the morning was the first day... the evening and the morning was the second day... the third day... the forth day, and etc. (more on this later). These days clearly comprise the "Creation Week". Still, our question becomes - what can we know about that? Was it a week like the weeks that pass between our paydays? Or a longer period of time.

I can't speak for westtexas here but I'm positive that neither he nor I will try to say that the word "yom" can never mean anything other than a literal 24 hour period. Take Genesis 1:5 for instance. "And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night." Here we see the word describing an approximate 12 hour period of time. So, the word "yom" can mean a time shorter than a day, a day, or a period of time longer than a day. Most of the time, and I've read 95% of the time, it means one literal day.

Question: When is a day not a day?
Answer: When it clearly can not be.

If we are speaking about the "days of Uzziah king of Judah," it simply can not mean a single day. No discussion is needed. Using traditional hermeneutics allows us to accept the common meanings of words without trying to a stretch their meanings. Word meanings are accepted at face value unless the context clearly demands it. For instance, if we were in a court of law and an attorney showed a contract stating that a work order would be started on the first day after it was authorized, and that the work would be completed within a time frame of six (6) days, how absurd would the defendant be if he mentioned the "days of Uzziah, king of Judah" defense?

We can see that in Genesis One, nearly every phrase is connected with the phrase which follows by means of the small Hebrew letter waw, usually translated as "and" in English Bibles. The style of writing is historical and consecutive and it expresses a time sequence of activity, one event following another in a line. But aside from the debate about the word, let's look at the meaning behind the words. God said, "Light be." --and light was. The context demands immediacy. Let's take a quick look at the Hebrew by clicking on the following link to the online Hebrew Interlinear Bible and get a better sense of what was said here. We will see what we already know, Hebrew and English are very different languages.

Here's the link: Free Online Hebrew Interlinear Bible, Genesis Chapter 1
Hebrew Text : WLC_v (v1.1): Westminster Leningrad Codex with vowels
Sublinears : WLC_t, CHES (v2.0),
Translation : Authorised Version.

Notice that Noun and Pronouns in Hebrew are not given in the same order as they are in English.
בְּ רֵ אשִׁ ית 11 (b·ra++++h) in·beginning
בָּ רָ א (bra) he-created
אֱהִ ים (aleim) Elohim

Gen 1:1 [In beginning he-created] Who created? [Elohim] created.

Continue to read and as you do, take yourself away from the age-old discussion about age-old matters. Let yourself ponder what God has declared. Do I know exactly what God meant, what He had in mind, when He did that? I do not. Not precisely. I do get the sense of immediacy. It is clearly conveyed. There is no sense of delay between God's command "Let there be light and there was light." That little word "and" is just a letter in the Hebrew, the same letter ("waw") is used in "and the evening and the morning was the first day." There is no stretch needed to understand what is meant here.

 

[chessman]

Sparrow, Thanks once again for your considered discussion. Obviously you take the Scripture seriously and care about it as do I. The reason I’m referencing your quotes is not for debate purposes as much as it is to clarify the topic of discussion and analysis of Scripture. So, here goes:

Of the more than 2,000 uses of the word, 95% mean a single day without question. That leaves 5% that clearly don't mean a single day or at least there is some question about it. When we eliminate the references to "The Day of the Lord," the number is reduced substantially.

When someone says 95% of the time it means X and 5% of the time it means Y, usually that registers with people that there’s a 95% chance that Yowm means 24 hour day in Genesis 1 and only 5% that it doesn’t. But that’s just simply not accurate or a good hermeneutical method for the idea of translation of Hebrew into English meanings. It’s the context that determines meaning, not percentages of occurrence elsewhere. The “95%†argument is not a valid argument. I actually believe you and others might agree since you say the Yowm within “The Day of the Lord†is not 24 hours with greater than 5% probability, I assume.

In previous posts, we've discussed the unique character of the Genesis 5 genealogy/chronology documenting the number of years that past between Adam and Noah.

Key evidence which I mentioned originally and later is that in fact Genesis 5 DOES NOT document the number of years that past between Adam and Noah. You did this when you added them to get 1056 years. If God and Moses wanted us to know that the number of years between Adam and Noah was 1056, He could have done this as He did 1 Chronicles 23:3 The Levites, thirty years old and upward, were numbered, and the total was 38,000 men. If the text has said 1056 years from Adam to Noah, then you'd have a great argument. But it doesn't.

The evening and the morning was the first day... the evening and the morning was the second day... the third day... the forth day, and etc. (more on this later).

These days clearly comprise the "Creation Week". Still, our question becomes - what can we know about that? Was it a week like the weeks that pass between our paydays? Or a longer period of time.

Actually the text DOES NOT say “..the first day, … the second day, …â€. Not until you get to Day 6 does the Hebrew communicate the definite article (the in Hebrew “haâ€) that turns the number into “the sixthâ€. I have no idea why so many English translations did this. It’s actually incorrect. They assumed, since Day 6 had the definite article that renders them a list of ordinal days, God meant it for days 1 thru 5. Maybe if they hadn’t done that (inserted “haâ€), we wouldn’t be here today. But as you pointed out earlier, I’m not the first to notice this and it’s not a new discussion/debate. The First Century Bishop Basil of Caesarea pointed this out by “If then the beginning of time is called ‘one day’ rather than ‘the first day’ it is because Scripture wished to establish its relationship with eternityâ€. I should add that several of his family members were martyred because of their refusal to back down from Scripture’s authority, by the way. I’d like to think I would do the same if required of me, but I don’t know…really. I’m glad it’s not required of me. Anyway, this fact (no definite article for days 1-5) is another reason this idea of Yowm cannot mean more than 24 hours when used with an ordinal list is an invalid argument. It’s not like that in the Hebrew to begin with. Therefore one of the premises to the argument is unture. Not to mention the conlcusion is wrong. There are examples where they are used together where Yowm means more than 24 hours (previous post).

So, the word "yom" can mean a time shorter than a day, a day, or a period of time longer than a day. Most of the time, and I've read 95% of the time, it means one literal day.

There’s that “probability†“argument†again. It’s not a good argument at all. But I’m glad we can agree to the principle that Yowm could mean more or less than 24 hours within its proper context. It’s frankly the only reasonable approach to take. I admit that these Yowm’s could be less than 24 hours, for example. Maybe the first “Day†was less than 24 hours, for example. I don’t think the text says. I do think it says the earth sprouted vegetation and yielded seeds and fruits and reproduced after their “kind†all within one of the “yowms†(Day three, not “the third dayâ€).Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in themâ€; and it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good.

Question: When is a day not a day?

Answer: When it clearly can not be.

Exactly! See Day three aboveJ Or even the narrative prior to the beginning of One Day when; In the beginning God (prepared, formed, fashioned, and) created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and an empty waste, and darkness was upon the face of the very great deep. The Spirit of God was moving (hovering, brooding) over the face of the waters.

If we are speaking about the "days of Uzziah king of Judah," it simply can not mean a single day. No discussion is needed. Using traditional hermeneutics allows us to accept the common meanings of words without trying to a stretch their meanings.

I agree. I suppose then the question is, is it a “stretch†to claim days 1-3 were normal 24 hour days or days 3-6. There’s never been any like them since, so how they could ever be called normal is beyond me to understand. But again, the translators put in “days†in place of Yowm here because it is clear that’s what is meant and the usages for Yowm allows for it. But it reads in the original just like Genesis 1’s “daysâ€.

God said, "Light be." --and light was. The context demands immediacy. Let's take a quick look at the Hebrew by clicking on the following link to the online Hebrew Interlinear Bible and get a better sense of what was said here. We will see what we already know, Hebrew and English are very different languages.

Exactly my point. It’s not a plain reading of the text for light’s creation to take 24 hours to occur. However, > 24 hours does seem to be a plain reading of “day†three (the earth brought forth…) and others as well.

That little word "and" is just a letter in the Hebrew, the same letter ("waw") is used in "and the evening and the morning was the first day." There is no stretch needed to understand what is meant here.

Again, exactly my point. So why would it have taken ~ 12 hours of darkness (on only 1/2 the Earth I should add) for the Earth to rotate around once more? What was going on during this time? No narrative at all between evening and morning. It sounds like a figurative phrase to distinguish the sequence of events as sequential to Earth’s, plant’s, animal’s and man’s creation. This narrative is in contrast to the Egyptian (and others) notion of a 24 hour cycle of repetition to creation.

 

[chessman]

The Genealogy of Adam to Noah does apply. It sets the time-frame for the period of years that past (and duration of time between Adam and Noah) at 1056 years and thereby gives us sequences of events that lead up to Noah and places the flood within Noah's lifespan.

……..
The OP topic/question is specifically the age of the Earth, not precisely Noah to Adam’s timeframe, is the only reason I mentioned that it’s not directly relevant. I agree that it’s applicable if you; 1) force the Yowm’s within the Creation narrative to be 24 hour days (see post #78 why this is not a good principle of Bible interpretation) when there is Biblically and naturally based evidence that indicates they are not 24 hours and 2) you force both the genealogies (Adam to Abraham) to be chronological when there is evidence they are not. I thought you had previously noted that there were potentially gaps in the Noah to Abraham genealogy, however. These two areas of study are why I simply summarized my understanding of these issues in the original post, thinking that most people that have studied this issue would agree.
From Post #14

I am aware that other genealogies have what is called a "telescoping" influence. I've not used those and purposefully not mentioned them. The genealogies of Genesis 5 differ…

So I thought there was agreement that telescoping was allowable.

Question: Have you found supportive statements from the experts that you can point to regarding the Genesis 5 genealogy? I'd like to see them, if you have. [/INDENT][/INDENT]

The OP had the ESV and AMP committee’s notes quoted concerning the genealogies, specifically on Gen 5. I’ve not seen you post other arguments or experts supporting justification for disagreement with these experts. However, I must assume that you do since you directly contradict their statement below:

I have no fear of contradiction when I state that there are 1056 years between the time of Adam to Noah.

I will not make that exact same statement for Genesis, chapter 11. There is some evidence of controversy that I've found about that particular genealogy which I have no problem presenting upon request. …
Still awaiting criticism(s) backed up by specific expert testimony (if it exists),

Since my OP, I’ve not seen any contradictory evidence to the ESV and AMP study notes which I posted. I consider that expert testimony and agree with them until I’m presented evidence to the contray. You’ve really only added up the years of each named descendant with the assumption they are first generation descendants.
The Biblical evidence against such a practice is;

1) As the ESV scholars’ point out, the narrative of Gen 5 actually breaks the cycles of repetition in several places to add additional narrative.
2) the other OT Hebrew genealogies in Scripture outside of Genesis (Matt 1 as compared to 1 Chro 3, for just one example) that clearly telescope some names (skip generations) . The point is, there’s Biblical precedence that the Hebrew words used here have “descendant†as their meaning. Gen 5’s listing of birthdates and death dates, does not hinder this understanding. Simply understanding the original Hebrew meaning (not the English) clears up this often misunderstood principle. In other words, just because it tells me how old Mahalalel was when Jared was born, or how old he was when he died, does nothing toward a total # of years for the entire lineage. If there are gaps, there are gaps yet the ages still are accurate.
3) there is no total years within the Gen 5 or Gen 11 genealogies that records the “1056 years from Adam to Noahâ€. Ussher’s 1648 A.D. chronology is a long time removed from the Ancient Hebrew language. Given the total summation is the customary Hebrew practice if that’s what is meant by the narrative. For example, all that is needed for the “1056†you mention to be inaccurate is that Jared (for example) to be a descendant of, yet multiple generations removed from Mahalalel. In fact, doesn’t the name Jared mean descent? Another clue, perhaps?
4) An apparent conflict with the genealogy given in Gen 4 (even considering that it traces Cain, not Seth) that understanding “son†to mean “descendant of†resolves.
​

Extra-Biblical evidences are:

1) the ESV study notes I mentioned in the OP from these translation committee authors on Genesis 5. I’m not going to post their names and credentials since it’s readily available for these publications online. http://www.amazon.com/The-Study-Bib...-1&keywords=esv+study+bible#reader_1433502410
2) A partial list of other prominent Hebrew language experts agree that telescoping is probable in the Gen 5 and Gen 11 genealogies (William Henry Green, B. B. Warfield, Charles Hodge, James Oliver Buswell, R. K. Harrison, Francis Schaeffer).
​

I’m not exactly sure what evidence that you’ve presented to the contrary there is that I should address. Your math skills are fine, however.

…I would challenge your statement #4 (posed as a question) because neither I, nor you may speak to why "they" did something. In point-of-fact, I have not seen any attempt to fiddle with Genesis 5, from Adam to Noah.

My question in Statement 4 was rhetorical, meant to encourage someone to consider why it is that the ESV contributors (or NIV or AMP) would make such a statement about telescoping. I really didn’t need you to provide an answer.

……about the Genesis 11 chronology. I'm okay with that. Introducing a +/- factor of a generation or two when people were living less than 120 years will not effect the total time calculation as much as introducing one (or more) when people lived longer (before the flood). … I should expect that once we have eliminated all the chances of H U G E gaps in Gen 5 (thousands of years), and pointed toward a possible tiny gap (hundreds of years) in Gen 11, we change the focus (and tone) of the thread to conform with your noble purpose. … As I've said, I'm comfortable with a +/- factor of two generations averaging out at 120 years each. … Your thoughts?

Why would you limit telescoping to one or two generations? That’s not a rhetorical question, by the way. Just wanting to make sure I’m not missing something that would preclude multiple generations. Maybe there were a lot of generations around Jared’s (meaning “descent" in Hebrew) time prior to Noah’s flood that simply weren’t worth mentioning. Uh, maybe they were so bad that God had to put an end to all their evil. Yes, I know that’s Gen 5 and not Gen 11 that you agree could have telescoping. I disagree, however and have listed multiple expert witnessed in this and previous posts to back it up.
Plus, again it’s not my belief (Biblically or scientifically) that Adam needed evolution to be created. God created Adam, not the Earth. I’m not looking for anything more than about 50,000 years (+/-) a few 10’s of thousands for Adam’s Creation date. I feel that unless you or someone else has any additional evidence that these ancient Hebrew genealogies cannot be considered to have telescoping within them, we’ve about finished with this area of discussion. We can just agree to disagree. Again, my goal has never been to change anyone’s mind. I just wanted to make sure there are no valid arguments for a “young†earth that I’ve not considered.

 

[reba]

We are expecting members to be aware of the fine line between discussion and argument. Moderator