Many Christians have serious questions about the days of Creation - were they literal days? And why would it matter anyway?
As you will see, it matters a great deal - this can literally mean whether or not Christ is God.
After all, we are told by scientists (falsely so called) that the earth is billions of years old, yet the scriptures are quite clear about the age of the earth: You know all those pages and pages of boring genealogies? Why are they there? It's so we know the time line of everything - including creation, and the age of the earth.
I won't get into the scientific debate behind the age of earth here, nor will I get into the history of the idea of an "old earth," other than to say it is a bankrupt philosophy from its roots. The idea of an old earth was invented soley to discredit the Biblical account of a global flood.
Instead, I'll focus on the scriptural context here, because there are a great many perfectly acceptable questions surrounding this - questions that I asked too, so I thought I'd share the answers here that I found. I'll gladly discuss the age of the earth scientifically over in the "Science and philosophy" forum, if someone wants to post a question.
James Ussher was the first to spell it out, adding up the genealogies throughout the scriptures and concluded that creation began 9 a.m., Sunday October 23, 4004 BC. It's been roughly 2,000 years since Christ, so that places the age of the earth at ~6,000 years old.
How long is a day?
First of all, the word used for the "days" of creation is Yome (strong's H3117). Whenever this word is used in association with day and night, it always means a literal day. Whenever it is used with a number (i.e., the "first day"), it is always a literal day. Whenever it is used with morning or evening, it is always a literal day.
So it's as if the Lord, looking ahead to the challenges to our faith we face today, and this great end times deception which was prophesied by the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:3-6), described the days of creation emphasizing that they were literal days:
Gen 1:3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Notice that it invokes evening and morning, a number, and light and darkness (day and night).
Exegetically speaking, there's no doubt these are literal days.
A day to the Lord is as a thousand years?
Of course, another verse in Peter comes to mind to many people:
2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Of course, I too was taught all the same propaganda in school that everyone else here got, so I was told the earth was "billions and billions of years old." So it's only natural that people would try and work these old ages into the scriptures - however, not only does an old earth not solve the problems for evolution, it causes fatal problems for evolution. (Again, I won't get into that here)
But maybe the earth is older? Maybe the days of creation were thousand year days, and not literal days?
No; then you have a math problem: Adam was created on day 6, lived through day 7, yet died 930 years old! (Gen 5:3)
Futhermore, if you read the passage from Peter carefully, you'll notice it goes both ways: Why is it that we always want to make the days longer, not shorter? It's because of what we've been taught (programmed, propagandized with) here in the "enlightened" culture. Why were they not literal days, but 0.00058 second-long days?
Whadaboutagap?
Is there perhaps a gap between verses 2 and 3 in Genesis chapter 1? Jonathan Sarfati answered this nicely in "Refuting Compromise," by looking at the grammar of the Hebrew writing. Verses 1 and 3 are a wow-consecutive, (pronounced vov-consecutive), verse 2, in the middle, is a wow-conjunctive. In other words, verse 2 can be best described as a paranthetical statement. Let's rewrite the first three verses of Genesis:
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.) And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
In other words, there is no gap between verse 2 and 3, verse 2 conjoins verse 1 and 3.
The miracles of Christ:
So the question arises: Do you believe in Christ, or do you believe Christ? (ouch, or amen?)
Jesus carried out many miracles that happened instantly, and he spoke them into existence. Why then is it that we have a tendency to believe these miraculous stories, yet we doubt the miracle of a literal, six-day creation? It was the exact same process - Christ (the Creator, John 1:3) spoke everything into existence during the days of Creation. When he visited earth 4,000 years later in the flesh, he spoke miracles into existence that even his enemies did not deny.
The only reason for suggesting an old earth
It cannot be overemphasized that the only reason the old earth was "invented" (and that's what it was - it wasn't "discovered" that the earth was old) was to discredit the history according to Moses. The idea of an old earth was only invented to explain away the evidence left behind by Noah's flood - evidence which is literally everywhere you turn. So by adhering to an old-earth paradigm, what you are really saying is that the biblical account is not correct, for the biblical account claims there was a global flood at the time of Noah.
What Would Jesus Believe?
If you discount the story of Noah, the ark, and the world-wide flood as allegory, then you discredit Christ and the Apostles. Christ and the Apostles were all young-earth creationists!
They believed in the story of Adam and Eve, the garden of Eden was a real place, the fall of man was a real event, and the consequences of sin were real consequences:
-Mark 10:6, Matthew 19:4, 1 Timothy 2:13
Jonah and the whale was a real story, involving a real person, a real whale, a real event:
-Matthew 12:40
Noah and the ark was a real story: Noah and his family were real people, the flood was a real event, the ark was a real boat, the animals were real:
-Matthew 24:37-39, Hebrews 11:7
There's no getting around it: If we evolved, or if the earth is millions or billions of years old, then Christ is not the Creator, Christ is not God, therefore Christ is merely a man. He may be a sincere man, but he is just a man. The Apostles also believed these stories to be fact.
If all of these men do not know the past, then why should we trust them for the future when they say "Ye must be born again?"
This is the crux of the matter, and it is these issues which caused people like Charles Templeton to convert to atheism.
Templeton was an evangelist who preached to packed-out stadiums of 30,000 people and had thousands come to know the saving grace of Christ through his ministry. Later on, Templeton was overcome by doubts hurled upon him by "scientists" who weren't there at the beginning, but authoritatively claimed that they "knew" the earth was billions of years old, and claimed to be able to "prove it." Templeton would not only become a very outspoken atheist, but he went on to write the book "Farewell to God: My reasons for abandoning the christian faith."
The interwoven Bible:
There is much more to this, the simple point being, that the moment you question any one part of scripture, you question all of it. It is all interwoven in a powerful way. Some quick examples:
Why was Christ crucified with a crown of thorns? Because he was bearing the consequences of our sins, and one of those consequences was thorns - as revealed in Genesis 3:18.
Why was John the Baptist specifically named John? Why was the angel Gabriel sent to name only two people: Jesus the Christ, and John? Because John is the same name as Noah, and baptism is an analogy to the flood of Noah, and the ark an analogy to Christ. When Christ was baptized by John, the Spirit of God descended on Him like a dove.
Nothing is left to chance - our God is a God of attention to detail: Why a dove? Again, it's an analogy to the flood: Noah released a dove from the ark, which did not return...until Christ was baptized.
All of scripture is interwoven, and it is a fascinating study in the word of God which again, because of space, I won't get into here.
One can now begin to see the relevance of scientific creation. You don't need to be a super-genius, nor understand the technical mumble-jumble. But even a simple understanding of the debates and argument is a powerful sword - especially in the hands of teenagers who are under the continual fire of the gattling guns of the enemy, trying to program them to question the word of God and believe "science, falsely so called."
EXCELLENT post, Ian! I never caught the correlation with the dove's return - awesome!
I'm guessing you've read into the truth about carbon dating. That should be enough to make anyone rethink the idea of the earth being billions of years old.
God provides so much proof that He is who He says He is and is allowing things to surface now that prove the "stories" in the Bible. I read something a few years back that told of massive pockets of water that had been found under the earth (I'll have to look for the article again - I think it was in BAR magazine). They found these pockets using some type of sonar - the article stated that the amount of water found, along with the amount of water still on the face of the earth, was enough to - yep, you guessed it - cover the face of the earth.
Some of the other things that you mentioned I would love to read about if you feel the urge to make a post - very interesting!!
Well thank ya, thank ya very mush (that's my Elvis impersonation).
Ya - I've actually been involved with a lot of Carbon 14 research; collecting samples from the Carboniferous (supposedly 300 million years old), samples from the paluxy river in Texas (rocks supposedly 100 million years old with dinosaur tracks in them), etc...
Whadya know - they all came back with C14 dates of 5 to 15,000 years old; so which of the "absolute dating methods" are correct?
At least these dating methods I've had success with - I'm not so sure about my dating methods here...:laugh:
(sorry, that was a really bad joke that came to mind when I realized where I was writing this...)
Ya, I'll try to write elsewhere on the "science" sections; posted a couple there.
And ya - I remember that one article on the subterranean water; if you ever stumble on it again, yes please send me the reference.
Oh! Ya - thanks for the suggestion; never thought about that. When filling out the profile, I didn't realize the restrictions it would put on those trying to email, cause you're right, there's people here to socialize and fellowship too and I'm certainly not opposed to that.
Wow! Great post iian, it seems like every verse in the Bible is only the tip of the ice berg with a wealth of knowledge and meaning just under the surface. God is awesome! Any good study tips for this new guy that you'd be willing to share?
jjarr - for a "new guy" you've shown a lot of wisdom in your posts! You are absolutely right; every word is merely the tip of an iceberg. It never ceases to amaze me - It truly is a living word. I love it when I listen to a truly annointed teacher: they not only give milk to the children in the audience, but will also give a mouthful of "meat" to those who are capable of chewing spiritual meat - you can't take notes fast enough, and if you listen to a recording of the message later, you get a completely new message out of it! It's the same with the word of God, for the same reasons - it is the Holy Spirit whispering in the recipient's ear - so it barely matters what the teacher says, because the Holy Spirit is giving personalized, specific instruction to each recipient.
The word of God truly is a living word that can speak to both children and to the spiritual old and mature.
Milk and meat are simply differentiated with an analogy to babies - you can't feed a baby meat; they will either spit it out, or choke on it. "Meaty" spiritual subjects cause the same reaction - people with either reject it or choke on it - it will not be received. If you're mature, you'll chew on it a looong time, and then swallow it. It's very deliberate. Meaty subjects like the complete otherness of Christ. Fun study, but not for the faint of heart.
One suggestion is to pick a specific scriptural question or interest you might have. I remember when I looked into the gift of tongues, I spent six months just on that subject alone. I listened to all of the views and did the Berean thing: Go to the word, see if what they say is true, pray, search out the scriptures.
So take a question and run with it - delve into the word, searching the scriptures over that one subject. A strong's concordance is worth every penny.
What I've found is it's amazing how one subject just winds up spilling over, leading to others. So while you're taking notes on this one subject, you wind up with an entire other LIST of questions spurring off from your original study.
It helps if you're obsessive compulsive too, as most of us creationists are :laugh:
Seriously though - you pray, and you get into it so much you have difficulty sleeping at nights because it's a continual stream of discovery. Finding multiple books on the subject at hand also helps, but - you have the Holy Spirit, so you need not that any man teach you.
But then why does God anoint teachers? Because teachers accelerate the learning. Yes, you can go out and build a space ship - anybody can if they are determined enough. It may take you fifty years and a whole wack of wasted time and money to figure out how to do it on your own- or.... you can go to school and learn from a teacher how to do it in under ten years and a whole lot less money and wasted time because that teacher went and spent all that time and money, figuring out the right way. They paid a price for your education.
It's the same with spiritual matters; you have the Holy Spirit, you *will* learn, He *will* teach you. Seek out anointed teachers, and your learning will become accelerated dramatically; hence the reason books come in handy. Problem is, there's a lot of bad "teachers" out there too.
Of course, then you find out how true Ecclesiastes is when Solomon said "there is nothing new under the sun" and you find out all these incredible things you're learning were already learned by others before you. :excited:
But it doesn't match the fun of discovering it yourself.
I dunno - I rambled on here... sorry if I bored you, and I hope it helps somewhat..?
I think you brought up some good points there Ian777, knowing the past is vital to understanding the present and future. I do however agree with the scientists who believe the earth to be millions or even billions of years old. I do NOT think this discredits our Father's existence.
Gen. 1:1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
I think this sentence does well to stand on it's own. It states that at some time in our distant past the earth was created and our Father was the creator.
Gen. 1:2
And the earth *WAS* without form, and void:stop:; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
*WAS*-Reference Strong's Hebrew #1961= hayah; to exist i.e. be or BECOME, come to pass.
Gen. 1:2 with *WAS* replaced with it's Hebrew meaning
And the earth *BECAME* without form, and void:stop:; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
SIDE NOTE: without form, and void = tohu va bohu (waste)
When I read verse 2 this way I am lead to believe that when God created the earth it was beautiful and whole, then something happened and he destroyed it.
"Does God create things without form, and void?"
Isaiah 45:18-19
18-For thus saith the LORD That created the heavens; God Himself That formed the earth and made it; He hath established it, He created it not in vain:stop:, He formed it to be inhabited: "I am the LORD; and there is none else.
19-I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not unto the seed of Jacob, 'Seek ye ME in vain:stop: :'I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.
:stop: The words "in vain" used in Isaiah chapter 45 verses 18 & 19 are the same as the words "without form, and void" used in Genesis chapter 1 verse 2.
Reference Strong's Hebrew #922 and 8414
New Testament
II Peter 3:5-7
5-For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God (Jesus is the word John 1:1) the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water (Not Tohu, or without form):
6-Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, *perished*: ( the word perished used here is apollumi in the greek, Strong's #622, "meaning to destroy fully". This was not Noah's flood because the earth was not FULLY destroyed then. We do know, considering you believe every thing above, that the earth was fully destroyed in Genesis Chapter 1 Verse 2: tohu va bohu)
7-But the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word (Jesus is the word) are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Another great description of the events that took place during Genesis 1:2 is in Jeremiah Chapter Four Verse 22-28. You'll hear the the words "without form, and void" again even the mention of cities, yet it states ..."and, lo, there was no man"...
I also have noticed that the word "man" as used in Gen. 1:26 means "adam" in Hebrew, while the word "man" used in Gen. 2:7 means "eth-Ha adham" in Hebrew and can be better translated "this very man". What I'm getting at is man or "adam" was created on the sixth day, while Adam or "eth-Ha adham" was created after the seventh day along with Eve and was the bloodline in which Jesus Christ would eventually be born.
When Genesis is interpreted as it was above it's all that much harder for scientists to discredit the bible. It proves that the earth is both very old AND created by our Father. We don't have to cling to the idea that the earth is only 6 or 7 thousand years old, we can instead say that mankind in the flesh has only existed for that long. Prior to that was the overthrow in which Satan lead the failed rebellion and God fully destroyed the earth.
Well, it's late, just thought I'd share this with whomever would listen, hopefully this helps someone with their pursuit of truth or if nothing else gives someone a laugh in amusement:winksmile:
