Talk:hexahemeron

RFV discussion: December 2021–January 2022
Rfv-sense: term of six days. I find only this single use. I found the requested Good quote, in which he uses this term (different spelling) in a theological (Genesis) context, so it does not support this general sense. There is a text that speaks of "the first hexahemeron" of Genesis, but this seems to be nothing more than a form of reinforcement and no reference is made to other hexahemera. This, that and the other (talk) 04:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It is a gray area - there would not be a word for this without the biblical six days of creation, but I think it is cited. Even though two of the cites explicitly refer to the biblical creation story, they use the term to simply mean a period of six days. Thus, "the first hexahemeron" of Genesis is the first six days ever, which happens to be the timespan of the creation story. Kiwima (talk) 01:17, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It's a stretch, I have to say. The most telling thing about the Katz cite is his use of the definite article, which seems to suggest an understanding that there is only one hexahemeron. If he had written "half of a hexahemeron" I would be more convinced.
 * Perhaps the issue is that did not (until I added it just now) have a sense "six days of creation"; it only had "creation story of the six days", which is not enough to properly reflect actual usage. This, that and the other (talk) 03:21, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * How about this? I have merged the two definitions. Kiwima (talk) 20:49, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I like it. This, that and the other (talk) 00:40, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

RFV-resolved This, that and the other (talk) 01:18, 1 January 2022 (UTC)