Frank

Paula, as I mentioned before, I didn’t expect my brief summary of my OEC viewpoint would win anyone over; I wrote it, as I said, to remind each other that though we had different interpretations as to the “duration” of the six creation days, we all had a high view of Scripture; we all tried to interpret it as consistently and coherently, as best we could; and where we could agree, we should, and where we couldn’t, to allow liberty of opinion and treat each other with love and respect. And I think we all agree, yes?

Still, while I respect your view, I will briefly point out why I still disagree. And then I will say no more, because I believe we want to move on.
1. It does not seem to me that whether you translate the refraining clause as “And there was evening, and there was morning–the first day” or as “And there was an end of the day, and there was a beginning of the day–Day One” at the end of each day–which are both literal and legitimate translations of the Hebrew words,’ereb and boqer, respectively,– iyou can automatically say this is a 24 hr rotational. First of all, when such literal days are described elswhere in the Hebrew text as from “by evening to evening” or “by morning to morning,” but not “by evening was and to morning was”. A clue that perhaps something other than a 24 hr rotational day may be in view? At least I think so, but again, you may disagree. Context and usage must decide.

2. Even if you are correct that Day 1 to Day Six are literal 24 hr rotational days, yom (“day”) in 2:4 must be being used in a metaphorical sense by Moses and refer to a “period” or “time” longer than 24 hrs, otherwise, you not have a linquistic problem but a logical one: 6 days cannot equal 1 day if they are all 24 hrs long!

3. And the closing refrain, “And it was evening and it was morning–Day 7” is not to be found. A very significant missing item, I would think, unless Day 7 is itself distinct from the previous six days in length. So I still standfast to my view.