God meant he created the earth in 24 hour days.

1. so all of those verses prove nothing because those all mean DAYS and I referred to the word DAY. Wrong. The number used for "first day" is the actual meaning to the Hebrew word echad: Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions: echaM0;d (Strong's H259) 1. one (number) a. one (number) b. each, every c. a certain d. an (indefinite article) e. only, once, once for all f. one...another, the one...the other, one after another, one by one g. first h. eleven (in combination), eleventh (ordinal) 2. Tell me where it says the 7th day continues into the present. Hebrew 4:4 doesn't say yom, but instead says hebdomes, which means "the seventh [day]" First off, Pro is not backing his claims up with evidence but merely making assertions. Secondly, even if I grant what he is saying and my source is somehow false, Hebrews 4:4-11 is obviously in parallel with Genesis 2:2. Thus, Hebrews does not have to mention yom since the context of those verses are clearly referring to the creation account. 3. this doesn't prove that the evening and morning referred to in Genesis is not legit evening and morning. The last verse refers to many evenings and morning. Correct, but it does refute your argument suggesting that they are legit. For example, yom occurs only 4 times outside Genesis in combination with both Hebrew words for "evening" and "morning." The actual word order of "evening" followed by "morning" in combination with yom (as seen in Genesis 1) occurs only once outside Genesis 1. However, this one verse that comes from Daniel 8:26 defines yom as a period of time at least 3000 years long, which happens to be the only verse that perfectly matches the usage found in Genesis 1: "The vision of the evenings [ereb] and mornings [boqer] Which has been told is true; But keep the vision secret, For it pertains to many days [yom] in the future." (Daniel 8:26) Lastly, the actual number of words in Hebrew is much fewer than that of the English translations. The words "and there was" are not in the Hebrew, but added to make the English flow better. The actual translation is "evening and morning 'n' day." There is no way to discern from the context that the text is referring to 24 hour days.http://www.godandscience.org... 4. Genesis 1:1, In the BEGINNING, God created the heavens and the earth. It says nowhere the first day, it only states the beginning. You also stated that it mentions all the raw materials to make stars, planets, etc. But you never said they MADE the sun on the first day. Even though I proved this argument wrong in the first sentence, I would like for you to provide evidence that those materials made the Sun and planets on the First Day.Tell me where it says that this should apply to others. This only applies to this and cannot apply it to another without concrete evidence.I have decided to fully explain the old earth creationist view of Day 1 and 4:'There are two main interpretations of what 1:1 really means. Some say that the verse is a summary of the rest of the Genesis creation account. Others say that the verse represents the first creative act of God. How can we tell which interpretation is correct? The answer is simple. When we look at Genesis 1:2,3 we see that it begins with the conjunction "and." This fact immediately tells us that Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 are part of one continuous thought. Remove the period at the end of Genesis 1:1 and read it as originally intended. The conjunction at the beginning of Genesis 1:2 tells us that Genesis 1:1 is not a summary of the creation account! This verse is a factual statement of what God did at the beginning of the first day. This is why it does not say "Then God said" in verse 1:1 like other verses within each Day order. There are other context clues that tell us that this is not a summary statement. If we continue reading the Genesis creation account, we come to the real summary at the end (Genesis 2:1). It would be superfluous to have a second summary at the beginning. As we continue to read Genesis one, we will notice how succinct the creation account really is. Thus, we can conclude that the text claims that God created the heavens and earth on the first day. What do the heavens consist of? Stars, galaxies, etc. So, we know that God created, at minimum, the stars and the earth. However, the Hebrew phrase translated "heavens and earth"(ha"shamayim we ha"erets) refer to the entire created universe [1]. This Hebrew phrase (known as a merism) means "all the raw materials needed to make sun, planets, stars, nebulae, galaxies, molecules, atoms", "the entire universe", OR "the organized universe, the cosmos." Some people claim that God created the earth first and that the rest of the heavenly bodies were created later. However, we are led to contemplate why God said that He created the "heavens and the earth." To accept this interpretation, we would have to say that God created "nothing" and the earth. If God had only created the earth, the Genesis 1:1 would have said, "In the beginning God created the earth." In Genesis 1:2, It is important to examine the context and the perspective to determine where the action is happening. If you establish the wrong point of view, it is going to lead to the day 1 and 4 contradiction everyone one has pointed out. After reading the text in Genesis 1:2, Where is God? In heaven? In outer space? NO! God is on the surface of the waters of the earth doing His creating "up close and personal." The other important thing about Genesis 1:2 is that it defines the conditions as they appeared from God's perspective on the surface of the earth. What are the conditions? ...the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep..." Why was the earth dark? Genesis one does not say, but God Himself tells us the answer in Job 38:4-9 that it was dark because it was covered with thick clouds: "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? ...When I made a cloud its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band" (Job 38:4-9) Furthermore, In verse 14 we have the same construction of "let there be” but, as discussed before, it is a statement of appearance NOT creation. At this point, the clouds present at the initial creation of the earth were completely removed so that the bodies themselves appeared for the first time on the surface of the earth. The passage tells us that the lights were allowed "to be" so that they could be signs of the seasons, days, and years. Verse 18 gives us another hint. The lights were placed in the sky to "separate the light from the darkness." Does this sound familiar? It is the exact Hebrew phrase used for God's work on the first day when, "God separated the light from the darkness" (Genesis 1:4) By using this phrase, the text is recounting the formation of the Sun, moon and stars from the first day. This means that the actual 24 hour period Pro is arguing for is ONLY mentioned on Day 4 NOT the entire week. Now, Pro might insist that Genesis 1:16-18 is not a continuation but separate because it said the word "made", which is also considered to be a creative act in English. However, we need be consistent with the Hebrew text not an English. If that word was referring to a creative act, it would have said it like the other verses in the text. Instead, the Hebrew word for “made” mentioned in verse 16 is "Asah", which means to fabricate or fashion pre-existing material. On the other hand, The Hebrew word for "created" (bara) means to create out of nothing. It is a completed verb form, meaning only that the creation was accomplished at some point in the past. Moreover, the Hebrew word "Bara" also carries the concept of creating something new. The completed action can be translated "had created," or "did create." If translated "created," the created must be understood as "created already" to reflect the Hebrew.' [1] [1] http://www.godandscience.org...; In the next round, I will lay out my case for days longer than 24 hours.