Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Peter Kirk" <Peter_Kirk AT sil.org>]

To adapt Michael's words: The problem, IMHO, is that folks want to find a
way to "work into the text" the literal 24 hour days necessary to coordinate
modern day pseudo-scientific "creationist" theories with what the Biblical
author may have intended to communicate. This "creationist" theory has a
rather short history, but it is out of step with one perfectly good
interpretation of the linguistics of the passage.

I am quite happy to leave this discussion at "we can't be sure whether the
author intended 24 hour periods or not". But I cannot accept that the
passage absolutely requires 24 hour periods.

Peter Kirk

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Hildenbrand" <hildenbr AT Haas.Berkeley.EDU>
> To: "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Cc: "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 10:02 PM
> Subject: Re: The 24 hour "evening and mornings" ???
>
>
> > The problem, IMHO, is that folks want to find a way to "work into the
> > text" the eons of time necessary to coordinate modern day scientific
> > theories with what the Bible clearly communicates.  Thus the development
> > of the "day-age" theory, i.e. each day represents an "age" of time (or
in
> > some cases a "revelatory time"), not a literal day.  This means that you
> > *can* wedge 5 billion years (or what ever) into the biblical text.  This
> > theory has a long history, but it is clearly out of step with the
> > linguistics of the passage.
> > Michael
> >
> >  On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Raymond de Hoop wrote:
>
> <snip>
>