Do YEC interpretations really accept ordinary days as what they actually stand for?
I don't believe YECs do accept ordinary days.
An ordinary day is a full cycle of day and night, or if we're only looking at the daytime (dawn to dusk).
This requires sunrises and sunsets -- the heart of what a true ordinary day is.
To superimpose one property associated with a day, is not accepting an ordinary day.
AND, common to many if not all YEC positions (I haven't come across one which doesn't do something like this),
is to take a property of time that we today associate with a day, and then assign that to "day" (yom).
This time period being 24 hours.
Why do YECs assign 24 hours to "day"? Because it is believed the Sun isn't created until Day 4.
On days 1-3 for light, while such isn't in the text, it is believed either God is the source of light or some other source.
The moment this is done, then we're no longer talking about an ordinary day in the plainest sense.
Am I knit-picking in not letting them have 24-hour days as an "ordinary day"?
Not at all. This is highly important to the debate and the strict guidelines YECs place upon interpreting the text for other positions.
But, if they don't even meet the requirements of a stricter interpretative method, then they can't claim superiority.
If Moses intended day (yom) in Genesis to literally mean an ordinary day, then we must accept that.
That forms part of the stricter interpretation method being used, and which YECs challenge Day-Agers with.
Note then, that equally saying that "day" only means "24 hours" isn't accept an "ordinary day".
This is no better than what YECs accuse Day-Age proponents of doing --
Day-Agers substitute in an referent found in the Hebrew lexicon for yom (day) as being an unspecific period of time.
YECs instead prefer to substitute in only a specific period of time (12/24 hours) while at the same token disassociating a day from a solar day.
BOTH, therefore symbolise yom to be a period of time: one specific, one not.
Only YEC remove meaning of day being associated with an Earth rotation and the Sun (solar day).
So that to me, leaves us with the follow advantages and disadvantages to each position.
- Takes Sun to be created in the beginning when God created the heavens and Earth. (v.1)
- Doesn't introduce a second unmentioned source of light, but follows creation events as would be seen from Earth's initial surface (where the Spirit of God is brooding over the waters v.2).
- If Moses intended "ordinary day", it doesn't accept this. Instead, it superimposes an acceptable variant found in the Hebrew lexicon (dictionary) as an unspecified period of time.
- Many believe more literal (seriously questionable as per above)
- Doesn't accept an "ordinary day" -- solar days do not exist until day 4 therefore a time period of 24 hours is superimposed which is also an acceptable variant found in the Hebrew lexicon (dictionary).
- Adds in a second light source for days 1-3 (for the light created on day 1)
- Sun not created until day 4 (a plain reading as understood by Moses and audience at the time would in my opinion lead them to believing the Sun as the light source.