• SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Is there even anything in Genesis to suggest that the ‘days’ were 24h long? I could see it being meant metaphorically…

    • GraniteM@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      “No, that wasn’t a metaphor! The Bible is literal truth!”

      “What about ‘The land shall not be sold permanently, for the land is Mine; for you are strangers and sojourners with Me,’ or ‘But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind,’ or ‘Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.’?”

      Those parts were metaphorical!”

    • ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      That’s a more popular justification now, but there’s definitely no textual defense of it, they’re just reinterpreting around thr scientific consensus. How often do you expect a book to define the term “day” before moving on? It was almost certainly written and intended to be treated literally.

    • Chakravanti@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Or just a matter of perspective. If “God” was just a programmer who could explain the difference between how long we spent writing code, running the software, and the simulation actual perspective difference.

      Ask the Dwarf Fortress.

      Or Puscifer.

    • Nora (She/Her)@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I grew up catholic and was sent to catholic school and this is what we were taught. That the creation story is metaphor, the catholic church believes God used the big bang and evolution to create the world and people, ect.

    • Kacarott@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      15 hours ago

      So I grew up around creationists. When I presented this idea, the only attempt at a justification I heard was something like “in the original Hebrew the word for a literal day was used, that’s how we know creation happened in literal 6 days”

      Which baffled me enough to shut me up, so that guy probably thinks he convinced me.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Which baffled me enough to shut me up, so that guy probably thinks he convinced me.

        This seems to happen to me more frequently these days. Sometimes a person will say something so absurd that it just stops me in my tracks and I’m sure they think it means they “won”

      • RiceMunk@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        Well duh, if they meant metaphorical day, they should have used the hebrew word for metaphorical days.

        /s

    • turtlesareneat@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Wanna know a secret… God didn’t even write that part. God’s version has him at a kmart in Toledo, Iowa buying the entire universe on a Saturday in 1997, at which point he installed it, but it did take several days because it was football season, but it was less than a week no matter what anyone else says.

    • andros_rex@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      17 hours ago

      There is “old earth creationism” which works along those lines. But creationists are “literalists,” which actually means they believe a specific interpretation of the text taught to them by their pastor.

      Really, you’d think that most anyone reading the texts would realize that Genesis 1 and 2 were mutually contradicting…