Re: How to encourage a former creationist to persevere in faith?

From: Peter Ruest <>
Date: Fri Sep 02 2005 - 00:48:05 EDT


The expression "there was evening /^erev/ and there was morning /boqer/" does
not justify 24-hour days, as the sequence would be wrong: the sequence, working
day - evening - morning, which occurs in Gen.1, neither corresponds to the
normal Old Testament sequence, evening - morning - working day, nor to the
sequence morning - working day - evening, which would appear to us to be more
natural. However, the Hebrew terms /^erev/ and /boqer/ have broader meanings
than our "evening" and "morning"; a more literal translation, "a transition
(mixing between two states) and a dawning (of a new age)," is compatible with
long ages. It may even suggests a very slow, almost imperceptible transition, as
would occur between two geologic periods.

At the same time, the concept of completeness may also be indicated, in the
sense of all that God decreed to be accomplished in that period of time.
Different aspects, like literal interpretation, metaphor, long age, and
spiritual significance, need not be mutually exclusive.

Peter Ruest

Iain Strachan wrote (1 Sep 2005 08:06:00 +0100):
> Randy,
> I like very much your ideas about "completeness", but I think you are
> trying to have your cake and eat it by claiming this is a literal
> interpretation. Certainly "evening" and "morning" are literally the
> beginning and ending of a day, but the "day" then has surely to be
> seen as a metaphor for "completeness" & hence, as a metaphor, it is a
> literary device. When a YEC person insists on a literal
> interpretation, they mean literal 24h days, not that the day is a
> symbol of completeness.
> Best,
> Iain
> On 9/1/05, Randy Isaac <> wrote:...

Dr. Peter Ruest, CH-3148 Lanzenhaeusern, Switzerland
<> - Biochemistry - Creation and evolution
"..the work which God created to evolve it" (Genesis 2:3)
Received on Fri Sep 2 00:49:41 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Sep 02 2005 - 00:49:41 EDT