APOCKETGUIDETO...SixDaysHowlongwerethedaysinGenesis1?

Copyright©2014Answers inGenesis–US.All rights reserved.Nopartof thisbook may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without writtenpermissionfromthepublisher.Formoreinformationwrite:AnswersinGenesis,POBox510,Hebron,KY41048ISBN:978-1-60092-994-6AllScripturequotationsaretakenfromtheNewKingJamesVersion.Copyright©1982byThomasNelson,Inc.Usedbypermission.Allrightsreserved.www.answersingenesis.org

IntroductionIn the church today, we see a number of approaches to the days of creationrecorded inGenesis1.Somesay that theywere literal, approximately24-hourdays.Otherstakethemtobelongperiodsoftime,duringwhichthegreatepochsof evolutionaryhistoryoccurred.Othersbelieve that theywere24hours each,but theyalso inserta longgap toaccount for thevastagesofseculargeology.And still others treat the entire account as nothingmore than poetry, insistingthatGenesishasnothingtodowithwhenorhowGodcreatedtheworld.But,whichoftheseviewsiscorrect?Howcanwedetermineifthesixdaysof

creationwereactualdaysorsomethingelse?Andisitreallyallthatimportantofanissue?ThisPocketGuide to SixDayswill answer these questions andmore.We’ll

examine thewords of JesusHimself and explore the views of Paul and otherbiblicalauthors.We’llseethatwhatwebelieveaboutthelengthofthecreationdays affects a host of other issues, such as our view of Scripture and God’scharacter.SincetheBibleisGod’sinspired,inerrantWord,wecantrustittogiveusclear

informationaboutthepast.

TheNecessityforBelievinginSixLiteralDaysKenHamThemajorityofChristiansinchurchesprobablyaren’tsurewhetherGodreallycreatedeverythinginsixliteraldays.Manybelieveitdoesn’tmatterwhetherittook six days or sixmillionyears.However, it is vital to believe in six literaldaysformanyreasons.ForemostisthatallowingthesedaystobelongperiodsoftimeunderminesthefoundationsofthemessageoftheCross.

Whydopeopledoubtthedays?Themajorreasonwhypeopledoubtthatthedaysofcreationare24-hourliteral

daysusuallyhasnothingtodowithwhattheBiblesays,butcomesfromoutsideinfluences.Forexample,manybelieve thatbecause scientistshave supposedlyprovedtheearthtobebillionsofyearsoldthenthedaysofcreationcannotbeordinarydays.If people use Scripture to try to justify that the days of creation are long

periodsoftime,theyusuallyquotepassagessuchas2Peter3:8,“...onedayiswiththeLordasathousandyears...”Becauseofthis,theythinkthedayscouldbeathousandyears,orperhapsevenmillionsofyears.However,ifyoulookattherestoftheverse,itsays,“...andathousandyearsasoneday.”Thiscancelsouttheirargument!ThecontextofthispassageconcernstheSecondComingofthe Lord Jesus Christ. This particular verse is telling people that with God,waitingadayis likewaitingathousandyears,andwaitingathousandyears islikewaitingadaybecauseGodisoutsideoftime—Heisnotlimitedbynaturalprocessesandtime.Thishasabsolutelynothingtodowithdefiningthedaysofcreation.Besides,theword“day”alreadyexistsandhasbeendefined,whichiswhy in Second Peter it can be compared to a thousand years. There is noreferenceinthispassagetothedaysofcreation.Someappealtofossilsallegedlybeingmillionsofyearsold.Butfossilsarethe

remainsofdeadcreaturesandplantsburiedbywater.Manyfossilsclearlyshowdeathconsistentwithsudden,catastrophicburial,supportingtheBible’saccountofaworldwideFlood.

Whatdoes“day”mean?

TheHebrewwordfordayinGenesischapter1isthewordyom.Itisimportanttounderstandthatalmostanywordcanhavetwoormoremeanings,dependingon context. We need to understand the context of the usage of this word inGenesischapter1.1RespectedHebrewdictionaries,liketheBrown,Driver,Briggslexicon,givea

number of meanings for the word yom depending upon context. One of thepassages they give for yom’smeaning an ordinary day happens to beGenesischapter 1. The reason is obvious. Every time the word yom is used with anumber, or with the phrase “evening and morning’, anywhere in the OldTestament,italwaysmeansanordinaryday.InGenesischapter1,foreachofthesix days of creation, the Hebrew word yom is used with a number and thephrase, “evening and morning.’ There is no doubt that the writer is beingemphaticthattheseareordinarydays.Would someone apply this to the empty grave? If we allow our children to

doubtthedaysofcreation,whenthelanguagespeakssoplainly,theyarelikelytothendoubtChrist’sVirginBirth,andthatHereallyrosefromthedead.

Whatifthedaysweremillionsofyears?The ideaofmillionsofyearscamefromthebelief that the fossil recordwas

built upover a long time.As soonaspeople allow formillionsofyears, theyallow for the fossil record to be millions of years old. This creates aninsurmountableproblemregarding thegospel.Thefossil recordconsistsof thedeathofbillionsofcreatures.Infact, it isarecordofdeath,disease,suffering,cruelty,andbrutality.Itisaveryuglyrecord.TheBibleisadamantthough,thatdeath,disease,andsufferingcameintothe

world as a result of sin.God instituteddeath andbloodshedbecauseof sin soman couldbe redeemed.As soon asChristians allow for death, suffering, anddiseasebeforesin,thenthewholefoundationsofthemessageoftheCrossandtheAtonementhavebeendestroyed.Thedoctrineoforiginalsin,then,istotallyundermined.If thereweredeath, disease, and sufferingbeforeAdam rebelled—thenwhat

didsindo to theworld?WhatdoesPaulmean inRomans8whenhesays thewholeof creationgroans inpainbecauseof theCurse?Howcanall thingsberestoredinthefuturetonomoredeathandsuffering,unlessthebeginningwasalsofreeofdeathandsuffering?Thewholemessageofthegospelfallsapartifoneallowsmillionsofyearsforthecreationoftheworld.Thewholeofthecreationrestored...towhat?TheBiblesaystherewillbea

futurerestoration(Acts3:21),withnodeathorsuffering.Howcouldall thingsberestoredinthefuturetonomoredeathandsufferingunlessthebeginningwasalsofreeofdeathandsuffering?Thewholemessageofthegospelfallsapartifyouallowmillionsofyears(withdeathandsuffering)fortheworld’screation.

HowshouldweapproachScripture?Oneofthemajorproblemsweallhave(infact,itisthesameproblemAdam

andEvehad) is thatwe tend to start fromoutsideGod’sWordand thengo towhatGodhaswrittenintheBible(or—inAdam’scase—whatGodsaiddirectlytohim)totrytointerpretitonthebasisofourownideas.Thisisreallythemajorreasonwhymostpeoplequestionthedaysofcreation.WeneedtorealizethattheBibleisGod’sWord.AndasitistheinspiredWord

oftheinfiniteCreator,God,thenitmustbeself-authenticatingandself-attesting.Thus,weshouldalwaysstartwithwhatGod’sWordsaysregardlessofoutsideideas.OnlyGod’sWordisinfallible.Ifweallowourchildrentoacceptthepossibilitythatwecandoubtthedaysof

creation when the language speaks so plainly, then we are teaching them aparticular approach to all ofScripture.Why shouldn’t they then start to doubtthatChrist’sVirginBirthreallymeansavirginbirth?Whyshouldn’ttheystarttodoubtthattheResurrectionreallymeansresurrection?Infact,therearemanytheologianswhodoubttheseverythings,astheyhave

cometodisbelievetheplainwordsofScripturewritteninthefoundationalBookofGenesis.TheBibleisthecorrectfoundationtolookatallotherthings.Ifwedon’tstart

therethenwearestartingwiththewrongfoundation.TheApostlePaulneededto get theGreeks back to the correct foundationwhen hewas preaching.ThePaulwas grievedwhen he found the city ofAthens steeped in idolatry (Acts17:16).Whenhenoticedthealtar“totheunknowngod,”heusedtheopportunityto tell the philosophers that their unknown god is God the Creator, Lord ofheaven and earth. Sometimeswe need to echo this same sentimentwithin thechurch—togetbacktoGod’sWordasthefoundationfromtheveryfirstverse.

WhydidGodtakesixdays?Ifyouthinkaboutit,aninfiniteCreatorGodcouldhavecreatedeverythingin

no time.Why, then, didHe take as long as six days? The answer is given inExodus20:11.HerewefindthatGodtellsusthatHedeliberatelytooksixdaysandrestedforoneasapatternforman—thisiswheretheseven-dayweekcomes

from.Theseven-dayweekhasnobasisforexistingexceptfromScripture.Ifonebelieves that the days of creation are long periods of time, then the weekbecomesmeaningless.TheBibletellsusthatAdamwascreatedonthesixthday.Ifhelivedthrough

daysixanddayseven,andthendiedwhenhewas930yearsold,andifeachofthesedayswasathousandoramillionyears,youhavemajorproblems!Onthefourthdayofcreation(Genesis1:14–19),wearegiventhecomparisonofdaytonight,anddaystoyears.If theword“day”doesn’tmeananordinaryday,thenthecomparisonofdaytonightanddaytoyearsbecomesmeaningless.Wastheredeath,pain,andsufferingbeforeAdamandEve’ssin?Attheclose

oftheCreationWeek,GodcalledeverythingHehadmade“verygood.”Thisispowerful evidence against the idea that long ages of suffering and dying tookplacebeforethefirstmanandwoman,AdamandEve,appeared.Werethedays24 hours?Most definitely! “Let God be true, but everyman a liar” (Romans3:4).

Endnote1.Fordiscussiononthefewusesofyominwhichthemeaningisdisputed,see“TheDaysofCreation:ASemantic

Approach,”byJamesStambaugh,CENTech.J.,Vol.5(1),1991,pp.70–78.Returntotext.

Ken Ham, President and CEO, Answers in Genesis–USA & the CreationMuseumKen’s bachelor’s degree in applied science (with an emphasis on

environmentalbiology)wasawardedbytheQueenslandInstituteofTechnologyin Australia. He also holds a diploma of education from the University ofQueensland.InrecognitionofthecontributionKenhasmadetothechurchintheUSA and internationally, Ken has been awarded two honorary doctorates: aDoctorofDivinity(1997)fromTempleBaptistCollegeinCincinnati,OhioandaDoctorofLiterature(2004)fromLibertyUniversityinLynchburg,Virginia.SincemovingtoAmericain1987,Kenhasbecomeoneofthemostin-demand

ChristianconferencespeakersandtalkshowguestsinAmerica.HehasappearedonnationalshowssuchasFox’sTheO’ReillyFactorandFoxandFriendsintheMorning;CNN’sTheSituationRoomwithWolfBlitzer,ABC’sGoodMorningAmerica, the BBC,CBSNews SundayMorning,The NBCNightly News withBrianWilliams,andThePBSNewsHourwithJimLehrer.

DidJesusSayHeCreatedinSixDays?KenHamA rather vehement “old-earther” wrote recently and claimed: “a twenty-four[hour]understandingofthecreationdayswasneverstatedexplicitlybyJesus... .” Well, did Jesus anywhere clearly state that the earth was created in sixordinary(approximately24hourseach)days?When confrontedwith such a question,mostChristianswould automatically

go to theNewTestament to read the recordedwordsof Jesus to see if such astatementoccurs.Now,whenwesearchtheNewTestamentScriptures,wecertainlyfindmany

interestingstatementsJesusmadethatrelatetothisissue.Forinstance:

1. “But from the beginning of the creation ‘God made them male andfemale.’”(Mark10:6).Thismakes itclear thatJesus taught thecreationwasyoung,forAdamandEveexisted“fromthebeginning”—notbillionsofyearsaftertheuniverseandearthcameintoexistence.

2. “Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one whoaccusesyou—Moses,inwhomyoutrust.ForifyoubelievedMoses,youwouldbelieveMe;forhewroteaboutMe.Butifyoudonotbelievehiswritings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:45–47). In thispassage, Jesusmakes it clear that onemust believewhatMoseswrote.AndoneofthepassagesinthewritingsofMosesinExodus20:11states:“ForinsixdaystheLORDmadetheheavensandtheearth,thesea,andall that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORDblessedtheSabbathdayandhallowedit.”This,ofcourse,isthebasisofour seven-day week—six days work and one day rest. Obviously, thispassagewasmeanttobetakenasspeakingofatotalofsevenliteraldaysbasedontheCreationWeekofsixliteraldaysofworkandoneliteraldayofrest.

Infact,inLuke13:14,inhisresponsetoJesushealingapersonontheSabbath,the ruler of the synagogue obviously referred to this passage when he said,“Therearesixdaysonwhichmenoughttowork;thereforecomeandbehealed

onthem,andnotontheSabbathday.”TheSabbathdayherewasconsideredanordinary day, and the six days of work were considered ordinary days. ThisteachingisbasedonthelawofMosesasrecordedinExodus20,wherewefindthe Ten Commandments—the six-day Creation Week being a basis for theFourthCommandment.OnecouldconsidermanymorepassagesthatcertainlyimplythatJesustaught

thatHecreatedinsixdays,butarethereanyexplicitpassages?I believe there are. However, one has to approach this issue in a slightly

differentmanner.Whyjustgo to theNewTestament to try tofindout ifJesusstatedHecreatedinsixdays?Why not the Old Testament? After all, Jesus is the second person of the

Godhead,andhasalwaysexisted.First,ColossiansmakesitclearthatJesusChrist,theSonofGod,wastheone

whocreatedall things:“ForbyHimall thingswerecreatedthatareinheaven,and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions orprincipalitiesorpowers.AllthingswerecreatedthroughHimandforHim.AndHeisbeforeallthings,andinHimallthingsconsist”(Colossians1:16–17).WearealsotoldelsewhereinScripturehowJesuscreated:“Bythewordofthe

Lord the heavens were made, And all the host of them by the breath of Hismouth...ForHespoke,anditwasdone”(Psalm33:6,33:9).As well as this, we know that Jesus is in fact called “the Word”: “In the

beginningwastheWord,andtheWordwaswithGod,andtheWordwasGod.He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, andwithoutHimnothingwasmadethatwasmade.”(John1:1–3).SoJesus,whoistheWord,createdbyspeakingeverythingintoexistence.Now, considerExodus20:1: “AndGod spoke all thesewords, saying . . . .”

Because Jesus is theWord, thismust be a reference to thepreincarnateChristspeaking toMoses.Asweknow, there are a number of appearances ofChrist(“theophanies”)intheOldTestament.John1:18states:“NoonehasseenGodatany time.TheonlybegottenSon,

who is in the bosomof theFather,He has declaredHim.”There is no doubt,with rare exception, that the pre-incarnate Christ did the speaking to Adam,Noah,thepatriarchs,Moses,etc.Now, when the Creator God spoke as recorded in Exodus 20, what did He

(Jesus)say?Aswereadon,wefindthisstatement:“ForinsixdaystheLORDmadetheheavensandtheearth, thesea,andall that is in them,andrestedtheseventhday...”

Yes,JesusdidexplicitlysayHecreatedinsixdays.1Notonlythis,buttheonewho spoke thewords “six days” alsowrote themdown forMoses: “Then theLORDdeliveredtometwotabletsofstonewrittenwiththefingerofGod,andonthemwereallthewordswhichtheLORDhadspokentoyouonthemountainfromthemidstofthefireinthedayoftheassembly”(Deuteronomy9:10).Jesus said clearly: He created in six days! And He even did something He

didn’t do with most of Scripture—He wrote it down Himself. How moreauthoritativecanyougetthanthat?

Endnote1.EvenifsomeoneisconvincedthatGodtheFatherwasthespeakerinExodus20:11,theFatherandSonwouldnever

disagree.JesussaidinJohn10:30:“IandMyFatherareone”[neuter—oneintheessenceofdeity,notoneinpersonality].Returntotext.

24Hours—PlainasDayJudDavisIn1983,asaJunior,IwalkedintotheUniversityofGeorgia’sreligionbuildingterrified. The professor was an expert in Hebrew fromYale University. I hadbeenaChristianforonlytwoyears,andIwantedtolearnthatlanguage.Iknewthat thereligiondepartmentdoubted theauthorshipofOldTestament

books.Forthem,themythEnumaElishwasmore important forunderstandingGenesis thanwasMoses,Paul,or Jesus.Mostof thembelieved that evolutiondisprovedChristianityonceandforall.Jesuswasjustaman,andtheBiblewasabooklikeanyotherbook—writtenonlybymanandfulloferrors.IknewatthecoreofthissecularapproachtoBiblestudywastheaxiomthat

human reason is supreme. They believed that scholars are over, rather thanunder,God’sWord.SoIanxiouslywonderedhowstudyingHebrewinasecularsettingmighthelporhurtmyfaith.TheBible,however,hasanintrinsic,self-authenticatingpower—apowereven

skepticscannotdestroy. In spiteof skeptical attacks, theHebrew languagehasremained a passion of my life for almost thirty years. I focused my doctoralwork in England on the New Testament use of the Old Testament, and mycontinuousstudyofHebrewsincethenhasreaffirmedthesupernaturalnatureofGod’sWordanditstruthateverypoint.I teach at a Christian college that hosts a conference every year on a

contemporaryhottopic.LastyeartheschooldecidedtohostoneontheproperreadingofGenesis1–2.Thegoalwastogatherallthemajorevangelicalscholarsfora two-dayconferenceand let thempresent theircasesfordifferentways toreadthefirsttwochaptersofGenesis.The school stumbled on a serious problem—we could not find a nationally

recognizedOldTestamentscholarwhoheld the traditionalviewthat theworldwascreatedinsix,24-hourdays.Duringmysearch,IevenwenttothenationalEvangelicalTheologicalSociety

(ETS) meeting and attended the session on Genesis 1–2. During a paneldiscussion, some scholars began to openly mock the traditional view. Othersassured the audience that Enuma Elish, and the like, were the key tounderstanding Genesis. I felt like I was back in Peabody Hall. What washappening?When I left ETS, I was confused. Did the majority of evangelical scholars

really believe that theHebrew text failed to support the traditional view?Didthey believe that no one who studies Hebrew seriously believes that Godsupernaturallycreatedeverythinginsixdaysafewthousandyearsago?

TimeforinvestigationThis experience bothered me so badly that I started doing more research. I

knewthatmoderncriticalscholars think theday-ageviewandthemorerecentframework hypothesis are grammatically untenable from the standpoint of theoriginal author’s intent.Oneof thebestHebraists in theworld, JamesBarr ofOxfordUniversity,hadwritten ina letter twentyyearsago,“Sofaras Iknow,thereisnoprofessorofHebreworOldTestamentatanyworld-classuniversitywhodoesnotbelievethatthewriter(s)ofGen.1–11intendedtoconveytotheirreaderstheideasthat(a)creationtookplaceinaseriesofsixdayswhichwerethesameasthedaysof24hourswenowexperience(b)thefigurescontainedinthe Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from thebeginningoftheworlduptolaterstagesinthebiblicalstory.”1I wondered what modern “world-class” Hebraists would say about Barr’s

statementtoday,soItrackeddownseveralleadingexpertstoasktheiropinion.Hugh Williamson is the current Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford

University.Oxford isperhaps themostprestigiousuniversity in theworld,andWilliamsonisoneofthetopHebraistsanywhere.Inanemailheresponded,“Sofar as thedaysofGenesis 1 are concerned, I am sure thatProfessorBarrwascorrect. . . .IhavenotmetanyHebrewprofessorswhohadtheslightestdoubtabout this unless they were already committed to some alternative by otherconsiderations that do not arise from a straightforward reading of theHebrewtextasitstands.”2IalsoemailedBarr’s letter toEmanuelTovofHebrewUniversityJerusalem;

he would be on anyone’s list of Hebrew experts. Professor Tov responded inkind:“Forthebiblicalpeoplethiswashistory,difficultas it isforustoacceptthisview.”3HerewasconfirmationfromaJewishmanwhospokeandthoughtinHebrew.There is a residential theological research library called Tyndale House,

locatedoutsideofCambridgeUniversity inEngland.Youcan renta roomandliterallyliveinthelibrary.Itisperhapsthebestsuchfacilityintheworld.Duringitshistorysomeofthetopscholarshavebeenits“warden.”Thecurrentwardenis a youngman of encyclopedic knowledge named PeterWilliams.He sent apapertomethatsaid,“AlthoughtheYoungUniverseCreationistpositionisnot

widelyheldwithinsecularacademia,theposition—thattheauthorofGenesis1maintained that theworldwascreated insix literaldays—isnearlyuniversallyheld.”4Icouldgoon, listingdozensanddozensofnames,but there isnoneed.The

scholarship is clear. The writer of Genesis 1–2 meant the text to teachchronology in terms of normal days. So why would almost the entirety ofevangelicalscholarshiprejecttheauthor’sintent?

WhenadayisnotadayMy inability to find many evangelical scholars who support the traditional

viewwaspuzzling for another reason: evangelicals’ public commitment to theinerrancyofScripture.TheChicagoStatementonBiblical Inerrancy,signed in1978,gives the fullest statementonwhatevangelicalsbelieveabout theBible.Article12saysofcreationandtheFlood,“WedenythatBiblicalinfallibilityandinerrancyare limited to spiritual, religious,or redemptive themes,exclusiveofassertions in the fields of history and science.We further deny that scientifichypothesesaboutearthhistorymayproperlybeusedtooverturntheteachingofScriptureoncreationandtheflood.”Iwasconfusedwhymanyofthesignersdidnotbelieveinthetraditionalview

of Genesis 1–2. So I started emailing people I knew who had signed thedocument. What I found out was shocking. Henry Morris had proposed thelanguage for Article 12, and he meant it to exclude long ages and theisticevolution.5ManyofthesignersdecidedtorejectMorris’sintendedmeaningandreinterprethiswordsinlinewiththeirownbeliefs.ThiswasthesamethingthathappenedamongBible-believingchurchesatthe

turn of the twentieth century, during the early rise of modernist theology.MinistersinthePresbyterianChurch,forexample,wouldaffirmtheWestminsterConfession, but they would self-interpret the words. So where the confessionsaid that Jesus is God, the liberalminister agreed butmeant that Jesus had aGod-consciousnesslikeanyotherman.Thisistheologicaldoublespeak.Iamsurprisedthatevangelicalsarestumbling

downthesamedead-endpaththatwreckedmainlinechurchesacenturyago.

DaysaheadI would ask my evangelical brothers some basic questions. If the text of

Genesis1–2doesnotmeantoteachtraditionalchronologyand24-hourdays,6

1. Why does Jesus take Genesis 1–2 as teaching history (Matthew 19:4;Mark10:6)?

2. Why does Paul take it as history (Romans 5:12; 1 Corinthians 11:8–9,15:21–22,15:45;1Timothy2:12–14)?

3. Whydonearlyallworld-classHebraistsassumethatthewriterofGenesisintendednormaldaysandthetextashistory?

4. Whydidtheancient,medieval,andmodernchurch—untilabout1800—havefewcommentators(ifany)whobelievedinanancientuniverse?

5. Why do all of the ancient translations and paraphrases, such as theAramaic Targums, take the words at face value and translate them as“days,”withnohintthattheymightmean“ages”inGenesis1?

6. Why is there little or no classical Rabbinic support for an ancientuniverse?

7. Why are there well-qualified PhD scientists who still support physicaldataasconsistentwithayoung-earthview?

Nobodyhasprovidedmewithanswersthatpointtoanythingbutatraditionalview of the original meaning. Anyone who says that a closer study of theHebrewleadselsewhereissimplyincorrect.Theoriginalintentisplain—adaywasaday,fromtheveryfirstmiraculousday.

Endnotes1.NotethatBarrdoesnotbelieveininerrancy;heissimplyaffirmingtheauthorialintentofGenesis1–2.Returntotext.

2.Emailtotheauthor,January7,2011.Returntotext.

3.Emailtotheauthor,December28,2010.Returntotext.

4.“NoAgonyBeforeAdam,”papergivenatUniversityofAberdeen,December17,2008,p.1.Returntotext.

5.Inatelephoneconversation,oneofthecoauthorsofTheGenesisFlood,Dr.JohnWhitcomb,toldmethatDr.HenryMorris,theothercoauthorofthatfoundationalbookinmoderncreationism,wastheproposerofthelanguage.BothweresignersoftheChicagoStatement.Returntotext.

6.SeeTerryMortenson,“Jesus,EvangelicalScholars,andtheAgeoftheEarth,”TheMaster’sSeminaryJournal18(2007):69–98,reprintedatwww.answersingenesis.org.Returntotext.

Jud Davis is Professor of Greek and Chair of the Christian Studies andPhilosophyDivisionatBryanCollege.

CouldGodReallyHaveCreatedEverythinginSixDays?KenHamWhyisitimportant?If the days of creation are really geologic ages ofmillions of years, then thegospelmessage is undermined at its foundationbecause it puts death, disease,thorns, and sufferingbefore the Fall. The effort to define “days” as “geologicages”resultsfromanerroneousapproachtoScripture—reinterpretingtheWordofGodonthebasisofthefallibletheoriesofsinfulpeople.ItisagoodexercisetoreadGenesis1andtrytoputasideoutsideinfluences

thatmaycauseyou tohaveapredetermined ideaofwhat theword“day”maymean.Justletthewordsofthepassagespeaktoyou.TakingGenesis 1 in thisway, at face value, without doubt it says that God

createdtheuniverse,theearth,thesun,moonandstars,plantsandanimals,andthe first two people within six ordinary (approximately 24-hour) days. Beingreally honest, you would have to admit that you could never get the idea ofmillionsofyearsfromreadingthispassage.ThemajorityofChristians (includingmanyChristian leaders) in theWestern

world, however, do not insist that these days of creationwere ordinary-lengthdays,andmanyofthemacceptandteach,basedonoutsideinfluences,thattheymusthavebeenlongperiodsoftime—evenmillionsorbillionsofyears.

HowdoesGodcommunicatetous?Godcommunicatesthroughlanguage.WhenHemadethefirstman,Adam,He

had already “programmed” him with a language, so there could becommunication.Human language consists ofwords used in a specific contextthatrelatestotheentirerealityaroundus.Thus, God can reveal things to man, and man can communicate with God,

because words have meaning and convey an understandable message. If thiswerenotso,howcouldanyofuscommunicatewitheachotherorwithGod?

Why“longdays”?

Romans 3:4 declares: “Let God be true, and every man a liar.” In everyinstancewheresomeonehasnotacceptedthe“days”ofcreationtobeordinarydays,theyhavenotallowedthewordsofScripturetospeaktothemincontext,asthelanguagerequiresforcommunication.TheyhavebeeninfluencedbyideasfromoutsideofScripture.Thus,theyhavesetaprecedentthatcouldallowanyword to be reinterpreted by the preconceived ideas of the person reading thewords.Ultimately, thiswill lead to a communication breakdown, as the samewordsinthesamecontextcouldmeandifferentthingstodifferentpeople.

ThechurchfathersMostchurchfathersacceptedthedaysofcreationasordinarydays.1Itistrue

that some of the early church fathers did not teach the days of creation asordinary days—but many of them had been influenced by Greek philosophy,which caused them to interpret thedays as allegorical.They reasoned that thecreationdayswererelatedtoGod’sactivities,andGodbeingtimelessmeantthatthedayscouldnotberelatedtohumantime.2Incontrasttotoday’sallegorizers,theycouldnotacceptthatGodtookaslongassixdays.Thus, the non-literal days resulted from extra biblical influences (i.e.,

influencesfromoutsidetheBible),notfromthewordsoftheBible.Thisapproachhasaffected thewaypeople interpretScripture to thisday.As

themanwhostartedtheReformationsaid,Thedaysofcreationwereordinarydaysinlength.Wemustunderstandthatthesedayswereactualdays(verosdies),contrarytotheopinionoftheHolyFathers.WheneverweobservethattheopinionsoftheFathersdisagreewithScripture,wereverentlybearwiththemandacknowledgethemtobeourelders.Nevertheless,wedonotdepartfromtheauthorityofScripturefortheirsake.3Againandagain,suchleadersadmitthatGenesis1,takeninastraightforward

way, seems to teach six ordinary days. But they then say that this cannot bebecauseoftheageoftheuniverseorsomeotherextrabiblicalreason.Consider the following representative quotes from Bible scholars who are

considered to be conservative yet who do not accept the days of creation asordinary-lengthdays:FromasuperficialreadingofGenesis1,theimpressionwouldseemtobethattheentirecreativeprocesstookplaceinsixtwenty-four-hourdays....Thisseemstoruncountertomodernscientificresearch,whichindicatesthat

theplanetearthwascreatedseveralbillionyearsago.4WehaveshownthepossibilityofGod’shavingformedtheearthanditslifein

aseriesofcreativedaysrepresentinglongperiods.Inviewoftheapparentageoftheearth,thisisnotonlypossible—itisprobable.5Itisasifthesetheologiansview“nature”asa“67thbookoftheBible,”albeit

withmoreauthority than the66writtenbooks.Rather,weshouldconsider thewords of Charles Haddon Spurgeon, the renowned “prince of preachers,” in1877:Weareinvited,brethren,mostearnestlytogoawayfromtheold-fashionedbeliefofourforefathersbecauseofthesupposeddiscoveriesofscience.Whatisscience?Themethodbywhichmantriestoconcealhisignorance.Itshouldnotbeso,butsoitis.Youarenottobedogmaticalintheology,mybrethren,itiswicked;butforscientificmenitisthecorrectthing.Youarenevertoassertanythingverystrongly;butscientistsmayboldlyassertwhattheycannotprove,andmaydemandafaithfarmorecredulousthananywepossess.Forsooth,youandIaretotakeourBiblesandshapeandmouldourbeliefaccordingtotheevershiftingteachingsofso-calledscientificmen.Whatfollyisthis!Why,themarchofscience,falselysocalled,throughtheworldmaybetracedbyexplodedfallaciesandabandonedtheories.Formerexplorersonceadoredarenowridiculed;thecontinualwreckingsoffalsehypothesesisamatterofuniversalnotoriety.Youmaytellwherethelearnedhaveencampedbythedebrisleftbehindofsuppositionsandtheoriesasplentifulasbrokenbottles.6Thosewhowouldusehistoricalscience(aspropoundedbypeoplewho,byand

large, ignoreGod’swrittenrevelation) to interpret theBible, to teachus thingsaboutGod,havemattersfronttoback.Becausewearefallen,falliblecreatures,we need God’s written Word, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, to properlyunderstandnaturalhistory.TherespectedsystematictheologianBerkhofsaid:Sincetheentranceofsinintotheworld,mancangathertrueknowledgeaboutGodfromHisgeneralrevelationonlyifhestudiesitinthelightofScripture,inwhichtheelementsofGod’soriginalself-revelation,whichwereobscuredandpervertedbytheblightofsin,arerepublished,corrected,andinterpreted....SomeareinclinedtospeakofGod’sgeneralrevelationasasecondsource;butthisishardlycorrectinviewofthefactthatnaturecancomeintoconsiderationhereonlyasinterpretedinthelightofScripture.7In other words, Christians should build their thinking on the Bible, not on

science.

The“days”ofGenesis1WhatdoestheBibletellusaboutthemeaningof“day”inGenesis1?Aword

can havemore than onemeaning, depending on the context. For instance, theEnglish word “day” can have perhaps 14 different meanings. For example,considerthefollowingsentence:“Backinmygrandfather’sday,ittook12daystodriveacrossthecountryduringtheday.”Herethefirstoccurrenceof“day”means“time”inageneralsense.Thesecond

“day,”whereanumberisused,referstoanordinaryday,andthethirdreferstothedaylightportionofthe24-hourperiod.Thepointisthatwordscanhavemorethanonemeaning,dependingonthecontext.Tounderstandthemeaningof“day”inGenesis1,weneedtodeterminehow

theHebrewwordfor“day,”yom, isused in thecontextofScripture.Considerthefollowing:

1. A typical concordance will illustrate that yom can have a range ofmeanings:aperiodoflightascontrastedtonight,a24-hourperiod,time,aspecificpointoftime,orayear.

2. A classic, well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon8 (a dictionary) hasseven headings andmany subheadings for themeaning of yom—but itdefinesthecreationdaysofGenesis1asordinarydaysundertheheading“dayasdefinedbyeveningandmorning.”

3. Anumberand thephrase“eveningandmorning”areusedwitheachofthesixdaysofcreation(Genesis1:5,1:8,1:13,1:19,1:23,1:31).

4. OutsideGenesis1,yomisusedwithanumber359times,andeachtimeitmeansanordinaryday.9WhywouldGenesis1betheexception?10

5. OutsideGenesis1,yomisusedwiththeword“evening”or“morning”1123 times. “Evening” and “morning” appear in association, but withoutyom,38times.All61timesthetextreferstoanordinaryday.WhywouldGenesis1betheexception?12

6. InGenesis1:5,yomoccursincontextwiththeword“night.”OutsideofGenesis1,“night”isusedwithyom53times,andeachtimeitmeansanordinaryday.WhywouldGenesis1betheexception?Eventheusageofthe word “light” with yom in this passage determines the meaning asordinaryday.13

7. Thepluralofyom,which does not appear inGenesis 1, can be used tocommunicatea longer timeperiod,suchas“in thosedays.”14Addinganumber here would be nonsensical. Clearly, in Exodus 20:11, where anumberisusedwith“days,”itunambiguouslyreferstosixearth-rotationdays.

8. TherearewordsinbiblicalHebrew(suchasolamorqedem)thatareverysuitable for communicating longperiodsof time, or indefinite time, butnone of thesewords areused inGenesis1.15Alternatively, thedaysoryearscouldhavebeencomparedwithgrainsofsandiflongperiodsweremeant.

Dr. James Barr (Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University), whohimselfdoesnotbelieveGenesis is truehistory,nonethelessadmittedas farasthelanguageofGenesis1isconcernedthatSofarasIknow,thereisnoprofessorofHebreworOldTestamentatanyworld-classuniversitywhodoesnotbelievethatthewriter(s)ofGen.1–11intendedtoconveytotheirreaderstheideasthat(a)creationtookplaceinaseriesofsixdayswhichwerethesameasthedaysof24hourswenowexperience(b)thefigurescontainedintheGenesisgenealogiesprovidedbysimpleadditionachronologyfromthebeginningoftheworlduptolaterstagesinthebiblicalstory(c)Noah’sFloodwasunderstoodtobeworldwideandextinguishallhumanandanimallifeexceptforthoseintheark.16In like manner, nineteenth century liberal Professor Marcus Dods, New

College,Edinburgh,said,If,forexample,theword“day”inthesechaptersdoesnotmeanaperiodoftwenty-fourhours,theinterpretationofScriptureishopeless.17

Conclusionabout“day”inGenesis1Ifwearepreparedtoletthewordsofthelanguagespeaktousinaccordwith

the context and normal definitions,without being influenced by outside ideas,thenthewordfor“day”foundinGenesis1—whichisqualifiedbyanumber,thephrase “evening and morning” and for Day 1 the words “light anddarkness”—obviouslymeansanordinaryday(about24hours).In Martin Luther’s day, some of the church fathers were saying that God

createdeverythinginonlyonedayorinaninstant.MartinLutherwrote,WhenMoseswritesthatGodcreatedHeavenandEarthandwhateverisin

theminsixdays,thenletthisperiodcontinuetohavebeensixdays,anddonotventuretodeviseanycommentaccordingtowhichsixdayswereoneday.But,ifyoucannotunderstandhowthiscouldhavebeendoneinsixdays,thengranttheHolySpiritthehonorofbeingmorelearnedthanyouare.ForyouaretodealwithScriptureinsuchawaythatyoubearinmindthatGodHimselfsayswhatiswritten.ButsinceGodisspeaking,itisnotfittingforyouwantonlytoturnHisWordinthedirectionyouwishtogo.18Similarly,JohnCalvinstated,“Albeitthedurationoftheworld,nowdeclining

toitsultimateend,hasnotyetattainedsixthousandyears....God’sworkwascompletednotinamomentbutinsixdays.”19LutherandCalvinwerethebackboneoftheProtestantReformationthatcalled

the church back to Scripture—Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). Both of thesemenwere adamant that Genesis 1 taught six ordinary days of creation—onlythousandsofyearsago.

Whysixdays?

Exodus31:12saysthatGodcommandedMosestosaytothechildrenofIsrael:Sixdaysmayworkbedone,butontheseventhisthesabbathofrest,holytotheLord.WhoeverdoesanyworkintheSabbathday,heshallsurelybeputtodeath.ThereforethesonsofIsraelshallkeeptheSabbath,toobservetheSabbaththroughouttheirgenerations,foraneverlastingcovenant.ItisasignbetweenmeandthesonsofIsraelforever.ForinsixdaystheLordmadetheheavensandtheearth,andontheseventhdayHerested,andwasrefreshed(Exodus31:15–17).

Then God gave Moses two tablets of stone upon which were written thecommandmentsofGod,writtenbythefingerofGod(Exodus31:18).BecauseGodisinfiniteinpowerandwisdom,there’snodoubtHecouldhave

created the universe and its contents in no time at all, or six seconds, or sixminutes, or six hours—after all, with God nothing shall be impossible (Luke1:37).However,thequestiontoaskis,“WhydidGodtakesolong?Whyaslongas

sixdays?”TheanswerisalsogiveninExodus20:11,andthatansweristhebasisoftheFourthCommandment:ForinsixdaystheLORDmadetheheavensandtheearth,thesea,andallthatisinthem,andrestedtheseventhday.ThereforetheLORDblessedtheSabbathdayandhallowedit.Theseven-dayweekhasnobasisoutsideofScripture. In thisOldTestament

passage,GodcommandsHispeople,Israel,toworkforsixdaysandrestforone—thusgivingusareasonwhyHedeliberatelytookaslongassixdaystocreateeverything. He set the example for man. Our week is patterned after thisprinciple.Now ifHecreatedeverything in six thousand (or sixmillion)years,followedbyarestofonethousandoronemillionyears,thenwewouldhaveaveryinterestingweekindeed.SomesaythatExodus20:11isonlyananalogyinthesensethatmanistowork

andrest—notthatitwastomeansixliteralordinarydaysfollowedbyoneliteralordinaryday.However,Biblescholarshaveshownthatthiscommandment“doesnotuseanalogyorarchetypalthinkingbutthatitsemphasisis‘statedintermsofthe imitationofGodoradivineprecedent that is tobe followed.’”20 Inotherwords,itwastobesixliteraldaysofwork,followedbyoneliteraldayofrest,justasGodworkedforsixliteraldaysandrestedforone.Somehavearguedthat“theheavensandtheearth”isjustearthandperhapsthe

solarsystem,notthewholeuniverse.However,thisverseclearlysaysthatGodmade everything in six days—six consecutive ordinary days, just like thecommandmentinthepreviousversetoworkforsixconsecutiveordinarydays.The phrase “heaven(s) and earth” in Scripture is an example of a figure of

speech called a merism, where two opposites are combined into an all-encompassing single concept, in this case the totality of creation.A linguisticanalysisofthewords“heaven(s)andearth”inScriptureshowsthattheyrefertothetotalityofallcreation(theHebrewsdidnothaveawordfor“universe”).Forexample, in Genesis 14:19 God is called “Creator of heaven and earth.” In

Jeremiah23:24God speaksofHimself as filling“heavenandearth.”SeealsoGenesis14:22;2Kings19:15;2Chronicles2:12;Psalms115:15,121:2,124:8,134:3,146:6;andIsaiah37:16.Thus,thereisnoscripturalwarrantforrestrictingExodus20:11toearthandits

atmosphereorthesolarsystemalone.SoExodus20:11doesshowthatthewholeuniversewascreatedinsixordinarydays.

ImplicationAsthedaysofcreationareordinarydaysinlength,thenbyaddinguptheyears

inScripture(assumingnogapsinthegenealogies21),theageoftheuniverseisonlyaboutsixthousandyears.22

RefutingcommonobjectionstosixliteraldaysObjection1“Science”hasshowntheearthanduniversearebillionsofyearsold; thereforethe“days”ofcreationmustbelongperiods(orindefiniteperiods)oftime.Answer

1. Theageoftheearth,asdeterminedbyman’sfalliblemethods,isbasedonunprovenassumptions,soitisnotproventhattheearthisbillionsofyearsold.23

2. Thisunprovenageisbeingusedtoforceaninterpretationonthelanguageof the Bible. Thus, man’s fallible theories are allowed to interpret theBible.Thisultimatelyunderminestheuseoflanguagetocommunicate.

3. Evolutionaryscientistsclaimthefossillayersovertheearth’ssurfacedateback hundreds ofmillions of years. As soon as one allowsmillions ofyears for the fossil layers, then one has accepted death, bloodshed,disease,thorns,andsufferingbeforeAdam’ssin.

TheBiblemakesitclear24thatdeath,bloodshed,disease,thorns,andsufferingareaconsequenceofsin.25InGenesis1:29–30,GodgaveAdamandEveandtheanimalsplantstoeat(thisisreadingGenesisatfacevalue,asliteralhistory,asJesusdidinMatthew19:3–6).Infact,thereisatheologicaldistinctionmadebetweenanimalsandplants.HumanbeingsandhigheranimalsaredescribedinGenesis 1 as having a nephesh, or life principle. (This is true of at least thevertebratelandanimalsaswellasthebirdsandfish:Genesis1:20,24.)Plantsdo

nothavethisnephesh—theyarenot“alive”inthesamesenseanimalsare.Theyweregivenforfood.ManwaspermittedtoeatmeatonlyaftertheFlood(Genesis9:3).Thismakes

itobviousthatthestatementsinGenesis1:29–30weremeanttoinformusthatmanandtheanimalswerevegetariantostartwith.Also,inGenesis9:2,wearetoldofachangeGodapparentlymadeinthewayanimalsreacttoman.GodwarnedAdaminGenesis2:17thatifheateofthe“treeoftheknowledge

ofgoodandevil”hewould“die.”TheHebrewgrammaractuallymeans,“dying,youwill die.” In otherwords, itwouldbe the commencement of a process ofphysical dying (see Genesis 3:19). It also clearly involved spiritual death(separationfromGod).AfterAdamdisobeyedGod, theLord clothedAdamandEvewith “coats of

skins”(Genesis3:21).26TodothisHemusthavekilledandshedthebloodofatleastoneanimal.ThereasonforthiscanbesummedupbyHebrews9:22:Andaccordingtothelawalmostallthingsarepurifiedwithblood,andwithoutsheddingofbloodthereisnoremission.Godrequiresthesheddingofbloodfortheremissionofsins.Whathappened

inthegardenwasapictureofwhatwastocomeinJesusChrist,whoshedHisblood on theCross as the Lamb ofGodwho took away the sin of theworld(John1:29).Now if the Garden of Eden were sitting on a fossil record of dead things

millions of years old, then bloodwas shed before sin.Thiswould destroy thefoundationoftheAtonement.TheBibleisclear:thesinofAdambroughtdeathandsufferingintotheworld.AsRomans8:19–22tellsus,thewholeofcreation“groans” because of the effects of the fall of Adam, and the creationwill beliberated“fromthebondageofcorruptionintothegloriouslibertyofthechildrenofGod”(Romans8:21).Also,bearinmindthatthornscameintoexistenceaftertheCurse.Becausetherearethornsinthefossilrecord,ithadtobeformedafterAdamandEvesinned.The pronouncement of the death penalty on Adam was both a curse and a

blessing. A curse because death is horrible and continually reminds us of theuglinessofsin;ablessingbecauseitmeanttheconsequencesofsin—separationfrom fellowshipwithGod—need not be eternal.Death stoppedAdamand hisdescendantsfromlivinginastateofsin,withallitsconsequences,forever.Andbecausedeathwasthejustpenaltyforsin,JesusChristsufferedphysicaldeath,sheddingHis blood, to releaseAdam’s descendants from the consequences of

sin.TheApostlePauldiscussesthisindepthinRomans5and1Corinthians15.Revelation21–22makesitclearthattherewillbea“newheavensandanew

earth”oneday,wheretherewillbe“nomoredeath”and“nomorecurse”—justlikeitwasbeforesinchangedeverything.Iftherearetobeanimalsaspartofthenewearth,obviouslytheywillnotbedyingoreatingeachother,noreatingtheredeemedpeople!

Thus, adding the supposed millions of years to Scripture destroys thefoundationsofthemessageoftheCross.Objection2AccordingtoGenesis1,thesunwasnotcreateduntilDay4.Howcouldtherebedayandnight(ordinarydays)withoutthesunforthefirstthreedays?Answer

1. Again, it is important forus to let the languageofGod’sWordspeak tous.IfwecometoGenesis1withoutanyoutsideinfluences,ashasbeen

shown, each of the six days of creation appearswith theHebrewwordyom qualifiedby anumber and thephrase “evening andmorning.”Thefirstthreedaysarewrittenthesamewayasthenextthree.Soifweletthelanguagespeaktous,allsixdayswereordinaryearthdays.

2. The sun is not needed for day andnight.What is needed is light and arotatingearth.Onthefirstdayofcreation,Godmadelight(Genesis1:3).The phrase “evening and morning” certainly implies a rotating earth.Thus,ifwehavelightfromonedirection,andaspinningearth,therecanbedayandnight.Where did the light come from? We are not told,27 but Genesis 1:3

certainlyindicatesitwasacreatedlighttoprovidedayandnightuntilGodmade thesunonDay4 to rule theday.Revelation21:23 tellsus thatoneday the sun will not be needed because the glory of God will light theheavenlycity.PerhapsonereasonGoddidit thiswaywastoillustratethatthesundid

nothavethepriorityinthecreationthatpeoplehavetendedtogiveit.Thesundidnotgivebirthtotheearthasevolutionarytheoriespostulate;thesunwasGod’screatedtooltorulethedaythatGodhadmade(Genesis1:16).Downthroughtheages,peoplesuchastheEgyptianshaveworshipedthe

sun.Godwarned the Israelites, inDeuteronomy 4:19, not toworship thesun as the pagan cultures around them did. They were commanded toworshiptheGodwhomadethesun—notthesunthatwasmadebyGod.Evolutionary theories (the “bigbang”hypothesis for instance) state that

the sun came before the earth and that the sun’s energy on the eartheventuallygaverisetolife.Justasinpaganbeliefs,thesunis, inasense,givencreditforthewonderofcreation.Itisinterestingtocontrastthespeculationsofmoderncosmologywiththe

writingsoftheearlychurchfatherTheophilus:Onthefourthdaytheluminariescameintoexistence.SinceGodhasforeknowledge,heunderstoodthenonsenseofthefoolishphilosopherswhoweregoingtosaythatthethingsproducedonEarthcamefromthestars,sothattheymightsetGodaside.Inorderthereforethatthetruthmightbedemonstrated,plantsandseedscameintoexistencebeforestars.Forwhatcomesintoexistencelatercannotcausewhatispriortoit.28Objection3

2 Peter 3:8 states that “one day is with the Lord as a thousand years,”thereforethedaysofcreationcouldbelongperiodsoftime.Answer

3. Thispassagehasnocreationcontext—itisnotreferringtoGenesisorthesixdaysofcreation.

4. This verse haswhat is called a “comparative article”—“as” or “like”—whichisnotfoundinGenesis1.Inotherwords,itisnotsayingadayisathousandyears;itiscomparingareal,literaldaytoareal,literalthousandyears.Thecontextof thispassage is theSecondComingofChrist. It issayingthat,toGod,adayislikeathousandyears,becauseGodisoutsideoftime.Godisnotlimitedbynaturalprocessesandtimeashumansare.What may seem like a long time to us (e.g., waiting for the SecondComing),orashorttime,isnothingtoGod,eitherway.

5. The second part of the verse reads “and a thousand years as one day,”which, in essence, cancels out the first part of the verse for thosewhowant toequateadaywitha thousandyears.Thus, itcannotbesayingadayisathousandyearsorviceversa.

6. Psalm 90:4 states, “For a thousand years in your sight are as yesterdaywhen it is past, and as awatch in the night.”Here a thousand years isbeingcomparedwitha“watchinthenight”(fourhours29).Becausethephrase“watchinthenight”isjoinedinaparticularwayto“yesterday,”itissayingthatathousandyearsisbeingcomparedwithashortperiodoftime—notsimplytoaday.

7. Ifoneusedthispassagetoclaimthat“day”intheBiblemeansathousandyears,then,tobeconsistent,onewouldhavetosaythatJonahwasinthebellyofthefishthreethousandyears,orthatJesushasnotyetrisenfromthedeadaftertwothousandyearsinthegrave.

Objection4Insisting on six solar days for creation limits God, whereas allowing GodbillionsofyearsdoesnotlimitHim.AnswerActually,insistingonsixordinaryearth-rotationdaysofcreationisnotlimitingGod,butlimitingus tobelieving thatGodactuallydidwhatHe tellsus inHis

Word.Also,ifGodcreatedeverythinginsixdays,astheBiblesays,thensurelythisrevealsthepowerandwisdomofGodinaprofoundway—AlmightyGoddid not need eons of time. However, the billions-of-years scenarios diminishGodbysuggestingthatmerechancecouldcreatethingsorthatGodneededhugeamounts of time to create things—this would be limiting God’s power byreducingittonaturalisticexplanations.Objection5AdamcouldnothaveaccomplishedallthattheBiblestatesinoneday(Day6).He could not have named all the animals, for instance; therewas not enoughtime.AnswerAdamdidnothavetonamealltheanimals—onlythoseGodbroughttohim.

Forinstance,Adamwascommandedtoname“everybeastofthefield”(Genesis2:20),not“beastoftheearth”(Genesis1:25).Thephrase“beastofthefield”ismostlikelyasubsetofthelargergroup“beastoftheearth.”Hedidnothavetoname“everything thatcreepsupon theearth” (Genesis1:25)oranyof theseacreatures.Also,thenumberof“kinds”wouldbemuchlessthanthenumberofspeciesin

today’sclassification.WhencriticssaythatAdamcouldnotnametheanimalsinlessthanoneday,

whattheyreallymeanistheydonotunderstandhowtheycoulddoit,soAdamcouldnot.However,ourbrainhassufferedfrom6,000yearsoftheCurse—ithasbeengreatlyaffectedbytheFall.Beforesin,Adam’sbrainwasperfect.When God made Adam, He must have programmed him with a perfect

language.Todayweprogramcomputersto“speak”and“remember.”HowmuchmorecouldourCreatorGodhavecreatedAdamasamaturehuman(hewasnotborn as a baby needing to learn to speak), having in his memory a perfectlanguage with a perfect understanding of each word. (That is why AdamunderstoodwhatGodmeantwhenhesaidhewould“die”ifhedisobeyed,eventhoughhehadnotseenanydeath.)Adammayalsohavehada“perfect”memory(somethinglikeaphotographicmemory,perhaps).Itwouldhavebeennoproblemforthisfirstperfectmantomakeupwordsand

nametheanimalsGodbroughttohimandrememberthenames—infarlessthanoneday.30Objection6

Genesis2 isadifferentaccountofcreation,withadifferentorder,sohowcanthefirstchapterbeacceptedasteachingsixliteraldays?AnswerActually,Genesis2isnotadifferentaccountofcreation.Itisamoredetailed

accountofDay6ofcreation.Chapter1isanoverviewofthewholeofcreation;chapter2givesdetailssurroundingthecreationofthegarden,thefirstman,andhisactivitiesonDay6.31BetweenthecreationofAdamandthecreationofEve,theKingJamesVersionsays,“OutofthegroundtheLordGodformedeverybeastofthefieldandeveryfowloftheair”(Genesis2:19).This seems to say that the land beasts and birds were created between the

creationofAdamandEve.However,Jewishscholarsdidnotrecognizeanysuchconflictwiththeaccountinchapter1,whereAdamandEvewerebothcreatedafterthebeastsandbirds(Genesis1:23–25).Thereisnocontradiction,becauseinHebrew theprecise tenseof a verb is determinedby the context. It is clearfromchapter1 that thebeasts andbirdswere createdbeforeAdam, so Jewishscholars would have understood the verb “formed” to mean “had formed” or“havingformed”inGenesis2:19Ifwetranslateverse19,“NowtheLordGodhad formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field,” the apparentdisagreementwithGenesis1disappearscompletely.Regarding the plants and herbs in Genesis 2:5 and the trees in Genesis 2:9

(comparewithGenesis1:12),theplantsandherbsaredescribedas“ofthefield”andtheyneededamantotendthem.Theseareclearlycultivatedplants,notjustplants in general (Genesis 1). Also, the trees (Genesis 2:9) are only the treesplantedinthegarden,nottreesingeneral.InMatthew19:3–6 JesusChrist quotes frombothGenesis 1:27 andGenesis

2:24when referring to the same man and woman in teaching the doctrine ofmarriage.Clearly,Jesussawthemascomplementaryaccounts,notcontradictoryones.Objection7There is no “evening andmorning” for the seventh day of theCreationWeek(Genesis2:2).Thus,wemuststillbeinthe“seventhday,”sononeofthedayscanbeordinarydays.Answer

Look again at the section entitled “WhySixDays?” above.Exodus20:11 isclearlyreferringtosevenliteraldays—sixforworkandoneforrest.Also,God stated thatHe“rested” fromHisworkof creation (not thatHe isresting!).The fact thatHe rested fromHisworkof creationdoesnotprecludeHimfromcontinuingtorestfromthisactivity.God’sworknowisdifferent—itis a work of sustaining His creation and of reconciliation and redemptionbecauseofman’ssin.Thewordyom is qualified by a number (Genesis 2:2–3), so the context still

determines that it is anordinary solarday.Also,Godblessed this seventhdayandmadeitholy.InGenesis3:17–19wereadoftheCurseontheearthbecauseofsin.PaulreferstothisinRomans8:22.ItdoesnotmakesensethatGodwouldcallthisdayholyandblessedifHecursedthegroundonthis“day.”Weliveinasin-cursedearth—wearenotintheseventhblessedholyday!Note that inarguing that theseventhday isnotanordinarydaybecause it is

notassociatedwith“eveningandmorning,”proponentsaretacitlyagreeingthattheothersixdaysareordinarydaysbecausetheyaredefinedbyaneveningandamorning.Some have argued that Hebrews 4:3–4 implies that the seventh day is

continuingtoday:Forwewhohavebelieveddoenterthatrest,asHehassaid:“SoIsworeinMywrath,‘TheyshallnotenterMyrest,’”althoughtheworkswerefinishedfromthefoundationoftheworld.ForHehasspokeninacertainplaceoftheseventhdayinthisway:“AndGodrestedontheseventhdayfromallHisworks....”However,verse4reiteratesthatGodrested(pasttense)ontheseventhday.If

someonesaysonMondaythatherestedonFridayandisstillresting,thiswouldnot suggest that Friday continued through to Monday! Also, only those whohave believed in Christ will enter that rest, showing that it is a spiritual rest,whichiscomparedwithGod’srestsincetheCreationWeek.Itisnotsomesortof continuation of the seventh day (otherwise everyone would be “in” thisrest).32Hebrews does not say that the seventh day of CreationWeek is continuing

today,merelythattherestHeinstitutediscontinuing.Objection8Genesis 2:4 states, “In the day that the Lord God made the earth and theheavens.”Asthisreferstoallsixdaysofcreation,itshowsthattheword“day”

doesnotmeananordinaryday.AnswerTheHebrewwordyomasusedhere isnotqualifiedbyanumber, thephrase

“evening andmorning,” or light or darkness. In this context, the verse reallymeans“inthetimeGodcreated”(referringtotheCreationWeek)or“whenGodcreated.”

Otherproblemswithlongdaysandsimilarinterpretations

IftheplantsmadeonDay3wereseparatedbymillionsofyearsfromthebirds and nectar bats (created Day 5) and insects (created Day 6)necessaryfortheirpollination,thensuchplantscouldnothavesurvived.This problem would be especially acute for species with complexsymbiotic relationships (each depending on the other; e.g., the yuccaplantandtheassociatedmoth33).AdamwascreatedonDay6,livedthroughDay7,andthendiedwhenhewas930years old (Genesis 5:5). If eachdaywere a thousandyears ormillionsofyears,thiswouldmakenosenseofAdam’sageatdeath.Some have claimed that the word for “made” (asah) in Exodus 20:11actuallymeans “show.”Theypropose thatGod showedor revealed theinformationaboutcreationtoMosesduringasix-dayperiod.Thisallowsforthecreationitself tohaveoccurredovermillionsofyears.However,“showed”isnotavalidtranslationforasah.Itsmeaningcovers“tomake,manufacture, produce, do,” etc., but not “to show” in the sense ofreveal.34 Where asah is translated as “show”—for example, “showkindness” (Genesis 24:12)—it is in the sense of “to do” or “make”kindness.Somehaveclaimedthatbecausethewordasahisusedforthecreationofthesun,moon,andstarsonDay4,andnotthewordbara,whichisusedinGenesis1:1for“create,”thismeansGodonlyrevealedthesun,moon,and stars at this stage. They insist the word asah has the meaning of“revealed.” In other words, the luminaries were supposedly already inexistenceandwereonlyrevealedat thisstage.However,baraandasahare used in Scripture to describe the same event. For example,asah isusedinExodus20:11torefertothecreationoftheheavensandtheearth,butbara isused to refer to thecreationof theheavensand theearth in

Genesis1:1.Thewordasah isusedconcerning thecreationof the firstpeopleinGenesis1:26—theydidnotpreviouslyexist.Andthentheyaresaid tohavebeencreated(bara) inGenesis1:27.Therearemanyothersimilarexamples.asahhasabroadrangeofmeaningsinvolving“todo”or“tomake,”whichincludesbaracreation.Some accept that the days of creation are ordinary days as far as thelanguageofGenesisisconcernedbutnotasliteraldaysofhistoryasfarasman is concerned. This is basically the view called the “frameworkhypothesis.”35 This is a very complex and contrived view which hasbeenthoroughlyrefutedbyscholars.36

Therealpurposeof theframeworkhypothesiscanbeseen in thefollowingquotefromanarticlebyoneofitsproponents:TorebuttheliteralistinterpretationoftheGenesiscreation“week”propoundedbytheyoung-earththeoristsisacentralconcernofthisarticle.37

Somepeoplewantthedaysofcreationtobelongperiodsinanattempttoharmonize evolution or billions of years with the Bible’s account oforigins.However,theorderofeventsaccordingtolong-agebeliefsdoesnotagreewiththatofGenesis.Considerthefollowingtable:

ContradictionsbetweentheorderofcreationintheBibleandevolution/long-ages

Biblicalaccountofcreation Evolutionary/long-agespeculation

Earthbeforethesunandstars Starsandsunbeforeearth

Earthcoveredinwaterinitially Earthamoltenblobinitially

Oceansfirst,thendryland Dryland,thentheoceans

Lifefirstcreatedontheland Lifestartedintheoceans

Plantscreatedbeforethesun Plantscamelongafterthesun

Landanimalscreatedafterbirds Landanimalsexistedbeforebirds

Whalesbeforelandanimals Landanimalsbeforewhales

Clearly,thosewhodonotacceptthesixliteraldaysaretheonesreadingtheirownpreconceivedideasintothepassage.

Long-agecompromises

Otherthanthe“gaptheory”(thebeliefthatthereisagapofindeterminatetimebetweenthefirsttwoversesofGenesis1),themajorcompromisepositionsthattry to harmonize long ages and/or evolution with Genesis fall into twocategories:

1. “Theistic evolution” wherein God supposedly directed the evolutionaryprocessofmillionsofyears,orevenjustsetitupandletitrun,and

2. “Progressivecreation”whereGodsupposedlyintervenedintheprocessesofdeathandstruggle tocreatemillionsof speciesatvarious timesovermillionsofyears.

All long-agecompromises rejectNoah’sFloodasglobal—it couldonlybealocal event because the fossil layers are accepted as evidence for millions ofyears.AglobalFloodwouldhavedestroyed this recordandproducedanother.Therefore, thesepositionscannot allowacatastrophicglobalFlood thatwouldformlayersoffossil-bearingrocksovertheearth.This,ofcourse,goesagainstScripture,whichobviouslyteachesaglobalFlood(Genesis6–9).38Sadly,mosttheologians years ago simply tried to add this belief to the Bible instead ofrealizingthattheselayerswerelaiddownbyNoah’sFlood.

Doesitreallymatter?Yes,itdoesmatterwhataChristianbelievesconcerningthedaysofcreationin

Genesis 1. Most importantly, all schemes which insert eons of time into, orbefore, creation undermine the gospel by putting death, bloodshed, disease,thorns,andsufferingbeforesinandtheFall,asexplainedabove(seeanswertoObjection1).Herearetwomorereasons:

1. It isreallyamatterofhowoneapproachestheBible, inprinciple.Ifwedonotallowthe language tospeak tous incontext,but try tomake thetext fit ideas outside of Scripture, then ultimately the meaning of anywordinanypartoftheBibledependsonman’sinterpretation,whichcanchangeaccordingtowhateveroutsideideasareinvogue.

2. If one allows science (which has wrongly become synonymous withevolution andmaterialism) to determineour understandingofScripture,then this can lead to a slippery slope of unbelief through the rest ofScripture.For instance, sciencewouldproclaim that a person cannot be

raisedfromthedead.DoesthismeanweshouldinterprettheResurrectionof Christ to reflect this? Sadly, some do just this, saying that theResurrectionsimplymeansthatJesus’teachingsliveoninHisfollowers.

WhenpeopleacceptatfacevaluewhatGenesisisteachingandacceptthedaysasordinarydays,theywillhavenoproblemacceptingandmakingsenseoftherestoftheBible.MartinLutheroncesaid:IhaveoftensaidthatwhoeverwouldstudyHolyScriptureshouldbesuretoseetoitthathestayswiththesimplewordsaslongashecanandbynomeansdepartsfromthemunlessanarticleoffaithcompelshimtounderstandthemdifferently.Forofthiswemustbecertain:noclearerspeechhasbeenheardonEarththanwhatGodhasspoken.39

PurewordsGod’speopleneedtorealizethattheWordofGodissomethingveryspecial.It

is not just the words of men. As Paul said in 1 Thessalonians 2:13, “Youreceiveditnotasthewordofmen,butasitis,trulythewordofGod.”Proverbs30:5–6statesthat“everywordofGodispure....DonotaddtoHis

words,lestHereproveyouandyoubefoundaliar.”TheBiblecannotbetreatedasjustsomegreatliterarywork.Weneedto“trembleathisword”(Isaiah6:5)andnotforget:AllScriptureisgivenbyinspirationofGod,andisprofitablefordoctrine,forreproof,forcorrection,forinstructioninrighteousness,thatthemanofGodmaybecomplete,thoroughlyequippedforeverygoodwork(2Timothy3:16–17).Intheoriginalautographs,everywordandletterintheBibleistherebecause

Godputitthere.LetuslistentoGodspeakingtousthroughHisWordandnotarrogantlythinkwecantellGodwhatHereallymeans!

Endnotes1.M.VanBebberandP.Taylor,“CreationandTime:AReportontheProgressiveCreationistBookbyHughRoss,Films

forChrist,”Mesa,Arizona,1994.Returntotext.

2.G.Hasel,The“days”ofcreationinGenesis1:literal“days”orfigurative“periods/epochs”oftime?Origins21(1):5–38,1994.Returntotext.

3.MartinLutherascitedinE.Plass,WhatMartinLutherSays:APracticalIn-HomeAnthologyfortheActiveChristian,ConcordiaPublishingHouse,St.Louis,Missouri,1991,1523.Returntotext.

4.G.Archer,ASurveyofOldTestamentIntroduction,MoodyPress,Chicago,1994,196–197.Returntotext.

5.J.Boice,Genesis:AnExpositionalCommentary,Vol.1,Genesis1:1–11,ZondervanPublishingHouse,GrandRapids,1982,68.Returntotext.

6.C.H.Spurgeon,TheSwordandtheTrowel,1877,197.Returntotext.

7.L.Berkhof,IntroductoryvolumetoSystematicTheology,Wm.B.Eerdmans,GrandRapids,Michigan,1946,60,96.Returntotext.

8.F.Brown,S.Driver,andC.Briggs,AHebrewandEnglishLexiconoftheOldTestament,ClarendonPress,Oxford,1951,398.Returntotext.

9.SomesaythatHosea6:2isanexceptiontothisbecauseofthefigurativelanguage.However,theHebrewidiomaticexpressionused,“Aftertwodays...inthethirdday,”meaning“inashorttime,”makessenseonlyif“day”isunderstoodinitsnormalsense.Returntotext.

10.J.Stambaugh,“Thedaysofcreation:asemanticapproach,”TJ5(1):70–78,April1991.Availableonlineatwww.answersingenesis.org/go/days;Editor’snote:thereisaslightlyupdatedversionofthispaperpublishedlaterattheEvangelicalTheologicalSocietythatmadethecaseevenstronger.Returntotext.

11.TheJewsstarttheirdayintheevening(sundownfollowedbynight),obviouslybasedonthefactthatGenesisbeginsthedaywiththe“evening.”Returntotext.

12.Stambaugh,Thedaysofcreation:asemanticapproach,75.Returntotext.

13.Ibid.,72.Returntotext.

14.Ibid.,72–73.Returntotext.

15.Ibid.,72–73;R.Grigg,“HowlongwerethedaysofGenesis1?”Creation19(1):23–25,1996.Returntotext.

16.J.Barr,personallettertoDavidWatson,April23,1984.Returntotext.

17.M.Dods,Expositor’sBible,T&TClark,Edinburgh,1888,4,ascitedbyD.Kelly,CreationandChange,ChristianFocusPublications,Fearn,Scotland,1997,112.Returntotext.

18.Plass,WhatMartinLutherSays:APracticalIn-HomeAnthologyfortheActiveChristian,1523.Returntotext.

19.J.McNeil,Ed.,Calvin:InstitutesoftheChristianReligion1,WestminsterPress,Louisville,Kentucky,1960,160–161,182.Returntotext.

20.G.Hasel,“The‘days’ofcreationinGenesis1:literal‘days’orfigurative‘periods/epochs’oftime?”Origins21(1):29,1994.Returntotext.

21.J.WhitcombandH.Morris,TheGenesisFlood,PresbyterianandReformedPubl.,Phillipsburg,NewJersey,1961,481–483,AppendixII.Theyallowforthepossibilityofgapsinthegenealogiesbecausetheword“begat”canskipgenerations.However,theypointoutthatevenallowingforgapswouldgiveamaximumageofaround10,000years.Returntotext.

22.L.Pierce,“Theforgottenarchbishop,”Creation20(2):42–43,1998.UsshercarriedoutaveryscholarlyworkinaddingupalltheyearsinScripturetoobtainadateofcreationof4004BC.UssherhasbeenmockedforstatingthatcreationoccurredonOctober23—heobtainedthisdatebyworkingbackwardusingtheJewishcivilyearandaccountingforhowtheyearandmonthwerederivedovertheyears.Thus,hedidn’tjustpullthisdateoutoftheairbutgaveascholarlymathematicalbasisforit.Thisisnottosaythisisthecorrectdate,asthereareassumptionsinvolved,butthepointis,hisworkisnottobescoffedat.Ussherdidnotspecifythehourofthedayforcreation,assomeskepticsassert.Young’sAnalyticalConcordance,under“creation,”listsmanyotherauthorities,includingextrabiblicalones,whoallgiveadateforcreationoflessthan10,000yearsago.Returntotext.

23.H.MorrisandJ.Morris,Science,Scripture,andtheYoungEarth,InstituteforCreationResearch,ElCajon,California,1989,39–44;J.Morris,TheYoungEarth,MasterBooks,GreenForest,Arkansas,1996,51–67;S.Austin,GrandCanyon:MonumenttoCatastrophe,InstituteforCreationResearch,ElCajon,California,pp.1994,111–131;L.Vardiman,ed.,RadioIsotopesandtheAgeoftheEarth,Vol.2,MasterBooks,GreenForest,Arkansas,2005.Returntotext.

24.K.Ham,TheLie:Evolution,MasterBooks,GreenForest,Arkansas,Introduction,1987,xiii–xiv;K.Ham,“Thenecessityforbelievinginsixliteraldays,”Creation18(1):38–41,1996;K.Ham,“Thewrongwayround!”Creation18(3):38–41,1996;K.Ham,“Fathers,promisesandvegemite,”Creation19(1):14–17,1997;K.Ham,“Thenarrowroad,”Creation19(2):47–49,1997;K.Ham,“Millionsofyearsandthe‘doctrineofBalaam,’”Creation19(3):15–17,1997.Returntotext.

25.J.Gill,ABodyofDoctrinalandPracticalDivinity,1760.RepublishedbyPrimitiveBaptistLibrary,Carthage,Illinois,1980,191.Thisisnotjustanewideafrommodernscholars.In1760JohnGill,inhiscommentaries,insistedtherewas

nodeath,bloodshed,disease,orsufferingbeforesin.Returntotext.

26.AllEve’sprogeny,excepttheGod-manJesusChrist,werebornwithoriginalsin(Romans5:12,18–19),soEvecouldnothaveconceivedwhenshewassinless.SotheFallmusthaveoccurredfairlyquickly,beforeEvehadconceivedanychildren(theyweretoldto“befruitfulandmultiply”).Returntotext.

27.SomepeopleaskwhyGoddidnottellusthesourceofthislight.However,ifGodtolduseverything,wewouldhavesomanybookswewouldnothavetimetoreadthem.Godhasgivenusalltheinformationweneedtocometotherightconclusionsaboutthethingsthatreallymatter.Returntotext.

28.L.Lavallee,“Theearlychurchdefendedcreationscience,”Impact,No.160,p.ii,1986.QuotationfromTheophilus“ToAutolycus,”2.8,OxfordEarlyChristianTexts.Returntotext.

29.TheJewshadthreewatchesduringthenight(sunsetto10pm;10pmto2am;2amtosunrise),buttheRomanshadfourwatches,beginningat6pm.Returntotext.

30.R.Grigg,“Namingtheanimals:allinaday’sworkforAdam,”Creation18(4):46–49,1996.Returntotext.

31.D.Batten,“Genesiscontradictions?”Creation18(4):44–45,1996;M.Kruger,“AnunderstandingofGenesis2:5,”CENTechnicalJournal11(1):106–110,1997.Returntotext.

32.Anon.,“IstheSeventhDayaneternalday?”Creation21(3):44–45,1999.Returntotext.

33.F.Meldau,WhyWeBelieveinCreationNotinEvolution,ChristianVictoryPubl.,Denver,Colorado,1972,114–116.Returntotext.

34.NothinginGesenius’sLexiconsupportstheinterpretationofasahas“show”;SeeCharlesTaylor’s“DaysofRevelationorcreation?”(1997)foundatwww.answersingenesis.org/docs/188.asp.

35.M.Kline,“Becauseithadnotrained,”WestminsterTheologicalJournal20:146–157,1957–1958.Returntotext.

36.Kruger,AnunderstandingofGenesis2:5,106–110;J.Pipa,“Fromchaostocosmos:acritiqueoftheframeworkhypothesis,”presentedattheFar-WesternRegionalAnnualMeetingoftheEvangelicalTheologicalSociety,USA,April26,1996;WayneGrudem’sSystematicTheology,InterVarsityPress,DownersGrove,Illinois,1994,302–305,summarizestheframeworkhypothesisanditsproblemsandinconsistencies.Returntotext.

37.M.Kline,“SpaceandtimeintheGenesiscosmology,”PerspectivesonScience&ChristianFaith48(1),1996.Returntotext.

38.M.VanBebberandP.Taylor,CreationandTime:AReportontheProgressiveCreationistBookbyHughRoss,55–59;WhitcombandMorris,TheGenesisFlood,212–330.Returntotext.

39.Plass,WhatMartinLutherSays:APracticalIn-HomeAnthologyfortheActiveChristian,93.Returntotext.

FromtheBeginningof...theInstitutionofMarriage?TerryMortensonRespectedChristian apologistsDr. JohnAnkerberg1 andDr.NormanGeisler2have launched another attack on young-earth creationism (YEC), this time byobjectinginawebarticletothefrequentYECuseofMark10:6,fromwhichwearguethatJesuswasayoung-earthcreationistandsoweshouldbetoo,ifwecallHimourLord.Ironicallyinalittle1991bookletonevolution,3Ankerbergandco-authorJohn

WeldonmentionMatthew19:4–5(theparallelpassagetoMark10:6)aspartoftheirdefenseoftheyoung-earthview.Theyevenstatethattheyhavestudiedthevariousold-earthreinterpretationsofGenesis“indetailandbelievetheyallhavefatalbiblicalflaws.”ItistragicthatAnkerberghassinceignoredJesus’teachingand his own reasoning based on it (or perhaps theywereWeldon’s argumentsandAnkerbergonlyhelpedwriteotherpartsofthebooklet).In any case, it is clear from Ankerberg’s comments when moderating the

Hovind-Ross debate (with an unfair old-earth bias) that he picked up manycompromiseviewsathisseminary.AndasshownbyDr.DavidMenton’slettertoAnkerberg in June1992,Ankerbergwas clearly an old-earther at about thetimeof thebooklet.This letter shows thedisrespectfulwayAnkerberg treatedhigh-profileyoung-earthcreationistPhDscientists,whohadgivenupmuchtimeto recordprograms forhim,and insteadhe substituted thegross errorsofold-eartherHughRoss.ButconsidernowAnkerberg’sandGeisler’scurrenthandlingofMark10:6in

their web article. In response to a question from the Pharisees about divorceJesusrepliedinthatverse,“Butfromthebeginningofcreation,Godmadethemmaleandfemale.”In their article, “DifferingViews of the ‘Days’ of Creation,”Ankerberg and

Geisler (A/G) first state theYEC reasoning onMark 10:6 and then give theirobjectionstothatview.VIII.Mark10:6AffirmsThatAdamandEveWereCreatedattheBeginningArgument:Accordingtothistext,“AtthebeginningofcreationGod‘madethemmaleandfemale.’”IfGodcreatedhumankindatthebeginningof

Creation,thentheywerenotcreatedattheendofmillionsofyears,astheold-earthviewcontends.Response:First,Adamwasnotcreatedatthebeginningbutattheendofthecreationperiod(onthesixthday),nomatterhowlongorshortthedayswere.Second,theGreekwordfor“create”(ktisis)canandsometimesdoesmean“institution”or“ordinance”(cf.1Peter2:13).SinceJesusisspeakingoftheinstitutionofmarriageinMark10:6,itcouldmean“fromthebeginningoftheinstitutionofmarriage.”Third,andfinally,evenifMark10:6isspeakingoftheoriginalcreationevents,itdoesnotmeantherecouldnothavebeenalongperiodoftimeinvolvedinthosecreativeevents.BelowIfirstrestatetheirargumentpointbypoint,whichisindented,andthen

offermyrefutationofeachpoint.A/Gresponse1:First,Adamwasnotcreatedatthebeginningbutattheendofthecreationperiod(onthesixthday),nomatterhowlongorshortthedayswere.Noticethattheyhaveslippedintheword“period.”ButJesusdidn’tsayAdam

and Eve were created at the beginning of the “creation period” (i.e., thebeginning of Creation Week). He said at the “beginning of creation.” He istalkingaboutthewholecreationfromJesus’daybacktotheveryfirstmomentofcreation,justasPaulisreferringtothewholecreationduringallofhistoryinRomans 1:18–20 and Romans 8:19–23. In other words, Jesus is saying thatAdamandEvewerecreatedatthebeginningofhistory.ThisisseenalsointheparallelpassagetoMark10:6foundinMatthew19:4,

whereJesussaysthatAdamandEveweresimply“atthebeginning.”JesususestheexactsameGreekwords(translatedas“fromthebeginningofthecreation”)inMark13:19andintheverseisclearlyspeakingofalltimefromthefirstdayofcreation toHisday.ComparealsoHisreference to thesimilarphrase“fromthefoundationoftheworld”inLuke11:50–51.Byaddingoneword(“period”),Ankerberg and Geisler have put a certain spin on what their Lord said andthereforemisinterpretedHim.So,thisobjectiontotheYECargumentfromthisversefails.A/Gresponse2:Second,theGreekwordfor“create”(ktisis)canandsometimesdoesmean“institution”or“ordinance”(cf.1Peter2:13).SinceJesusisspeakingoftheinstitutionofmarriageinMark10:6,itcouldmean“fromthebeginningoftheinstitutionofmarriage.”

They argue that ktisis (which is actually the noun “creation” not the verb“create,”asA/Gsay)inMark10:6shouldbetranslatedas“institution”sothatJesusshouldbeunderstoodtobetalkingaboutthebeginningoftheinstitutionofmarriage,notthebeginningofcreation.Theybasethisinterpretationonthefactthatin1Pet2:13ktisisistranslatedintheNIVas“toeveryauthorityinstitutedamongmen”orintheNASBas“toeveryhumaninstitution.”Buttheyhavenotpaid careful attention to the presence of “among men” (NIV) and “human”(NASB)inthisverse.TheGreek text is clear.Thephraseunderquestion ispasēanthrōpinē ktisei,

where the whole phrase is in the dative case (so literally “to every humancreation”)and theadjectiveanthrōpinē (“human”)modifiesktisei (“creation”).An institutional authority (such as kings, governors, and slavemasters,whichPeterdiscusses in thecontext) is indeeda“humancreation.”But this isaverydifferentcontextualuseofktisisthanwefindinMark10:6,wherenoadjectiveisused tomodify “creation.”Furthermore, inMark10:6 Jesus couldhave easilysaid“fromthefirstmarriage”or“fromthebeginningofmarriage”or“sinceGodcreatedman”or“sinceGodcreatedAdam,”ifthatiswhatHemeant.Finally,ifwegivektisisinMark10:6themeaning“authority”or“institution,”

itmakesno sense.Whatdoes from thebeginningofauthorityorbeginningof

institutionmean?TomakeitmeaningfulAnkerbergandGeislerwouldhavetoaddawordtothetext,whichwouldhavenocontextualjustification.Jesus is reaching farther back in history for the basis of his teaching on

marriage.ThePhariseesgobacktothetimeofMoses’writingsinDeuteronomy,whereasJesusgoesbacktothebeginningoftime.Jesusspokethesewordsabout4000 years after the beginning. Ifwe equate those 4000 yearswith a 24-hourday,thenJesuswasspeakingat24:00andthecreationofAdamandEveonthesixth literal day of historywould be equivalent to 00:00:00:35 (half a secondafterthebeginning),inthenon-technicallanguageofJesushereisthebeginningoftime.So,JesusisindeedsayingthatAdamandEvewereatthebeginningofcreation.A/Gresponse3:Third,andfinally,evenifMark10:6isspeakingoftheoriginalcreationevents,itdoesnotmeantherecouldnothavebeenalongperiodoftimeinvolvedinthosecreativeevents.Thisisveryoddreasoningfromtwomenwhousuallydisplaysuchexcellent

logicintheirwritingsandspeaking.IfJesusissayingthatAdamandEvewereat the beginning of creation, as He clearly was, then it should be patentlyobvious that there can be no long period of time (billions of years are whatAnkerbergandGeislerwanttofitintoGenesis1)beforeAdamandEve.Iftheuniverseistrulyabout15billionyearsoldastheevolutionistsinsist(andthesetwoChristianleadersaccept)andifthefirst truemanandwomanevolvedintoexistenceonlyabout100–200thousandyearsago(asevolutionistscontend,orifAdamandEveweresupernaturallycreatedonlyafewtensofthousandsofyearsago,asAnkerbergandGeislerprobablybelieve)thenAdamandEvewouldnotbe at the “beginningof creation”but at the tail endof the creation to-date! Iftrue,Jesuscouldhardlybemoremistaken.SoMark 10:6 (alongwith other statements of Jesus in the Gospels) clearly

shows that Jesus took Genesis as literal history and was a young-earthcreationist.4AndsinceDrs.AnkerbergandGeislercallHim“Lord”theyshouldrepentof theirold-earth teachingsandjoinYECsincallingthechurchbacktotheauthorityoftheWordofGodbeginningfromtheveryfirstverse,sothatwithgreatercredibilitythechurchcanproclaimthegospelandthemoralstandardsofScripturetoarebelliousandlost“evolutionized”world.The rest of theAnkerberg/Geisler article could be similarly refuted, but that

wouldmakethisarticletoolong.Mostoftheirarguments(whicharenotuniquetothem)arehandledbyChaffeyandLisleinOldEarthCreationismonTrial.5

Though it is primarily a thorough and insightful exposé of the many seriouserrors in the teachingsofHughRoss,whichbothAnkerberg andGeisler haveendorsed, it also refutesotherold-eartharguments.And to see that the ideaofmillions of years (which is clearly driving Ankerberg’s and Geisler’sreinterpretations ofMark 10:6 andGenesis) did not come from the rocks andfossils but from anti-biblical philosophical/religious presuppositions applied totherocksandfossils,seemybook,TheGreatTurningPoint.6Thesetwobooksare must-reading for every seminary professor, pastor and other Christianleaders.

Endnotes1.AnkerbergistheproducerandhostoftheinfluentialChristianTVprogram,“TheJohnAnkerbergShow.”Hehasalso

writtenmanyhelpfulbooks.Returntotext.

2.Geislerisaprominentphilosopher,formerpresidentoftheEvangelicalTheologicalSociety,currentpresidentofSouthernEvangelicalSeminaryandauthorofanamazingnumberofusefulbooks.Returntotext.

3.SeeJohnAnkerbergandJohnWeldon,TheFactsonCreationvs.Evolution,HarvestHouse,Eugene,OR,p.43,1991.Returntotext.

4.Mortenson,T.,“Jesus,evangelicalscholars,andtheageoftheearth,”AnswersinDepth,August1,2007,http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v2/n1/jesus-and-the-age-of-earth.Returntotext.

5.Chaffey,T.,andLisle,J.,OldEarthCreationismonTrial,MasterBooks,GreenForest,AR,2008.Returntotext.

6.Mortenson,T.,TheGreatTurningPoint,MasterBooks,GreenForest,AR,2004.Returntotext.

TerryMortenson earnedhisdoctorate inhistoryofgeology fromEngland’sUniversityofCoventryandhisMDivfromTrinityEvangelicalDivinitySchoolinDeerfield,Illinois.Heisapopularwriter,speaker,andresearcherforAnswersinGenesis–USA.

WhyDidGodTakeSixDays?KenHamWhenpeopleacceptatfacevaluewhatGenesisisteachingandacceptthedaysas ordinary days, they will have no problem understanding what the rest ofGenesisisallabout.WhenonepicksupaBible,readsGenesischapter1,andtakesitatfacevalue,

itseemstosaythatGodcreatedtheworld,theuniverse,andeverythinginthemin sixordinary (approximately24hour)days.However, there is aview inourchurches which has become prevalent over the years that these “days” couldhave been thousands, millions, or even billions of years in duration. Does itreallymatterwhatlengththesedayswere?Isitpossibletodeterminewhetherornottheywereordinarydays,orlongperiodsoftime?

Whatisa“day?”Thewordfor“day”inGenesis1istheHebrewwordyom.Itcanmeaneithera

day (in theordinary24-hourday), thedaylightportionof anordinary24-hourday(i.e.,dayasdistinctfromthenight),oroccasionallyitisusedinthesenseofanindefiniteperiodoftime(e.g.,“inthetimeoftheJudges”or“InthedayoftheLord”).Without exception, in theHebrewOldTestament theword yomnevermeans “period” (i.e., it is neverused to refer to adefinite longperiodof timewithspecificbeginningandendpoints).ThewordwhichmeansalongperiodoftimeinHebrewisolam.Furthermore,itisimportanttonotethatevenwhenthewordyom isused in the indefinite sense, it is clearly indicatedby thecontextthattheliteralmeaningoftheword“day”isnotintended.Somepeoplesaytheword“day”inGenesismayhavebeenusedsymbolically

and is thus not meant to be taken literally. However, an important point thatmany fail to consider is that aword cannever be symbolic the first time it isused!Infact,awordcanonlybeusedsymbolicallywhenithasfirsthadaliteralmeaning. In theNewTestamentweare told thatJesus is the“door.”Weknowwhatthismeansbecauseweknowtheword“door”meansanentrance.Becauseweunderstanditsliteralmeaning,itisabletobeappliedinasymbolicsensetoJesusChrist,soweunderstandthat“He”isnotliterallyadoor.Theword“door”could not be used in this manner unless it first had the literal meaning weunderstandittohave.Thus,theword“day”cannotbeusedsymbolicallythefirsttimeitisusedintheBookofGenesis,asthisiswhereGodnotonlyintroduced

theword“day”intothenarrative,butalsodefineditasHeinventedit.Indeed,thisiswhytheauthorofGenesishasgonetogreatlengthstocarefullydefinetheword“day”thefirsttimeitappears.InGenesis1:4weread,“AndGodsawthelight, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness” called“night.”Genesis1:5thenfinisheswith:“AndGodcalledthelightDay,andthedarknesshecalledNight.Andtheeveningandthemorningwerethefirstday.”Thisisthesamephraseusedforeachoftheotherfivedaysandshowstherewasaclearlyestablishedcycleofdaysandnights(i.e.,periodsoflightandperiodsofdarkness).

AdayandthesunButhowcouldtherebedayandnightifthesunwasn’tinexistence?Afterall,

itisclearfromGenesis1thatthesunwasnotcreateduntildayfour.Genesis1:3tells us that God created light on the first day, and the phrase “evening andmorning”showstherewerealternatingperiodsoflightanddarkness.Therefore,lightwasinexistence,comingfromonedirectionuponarotatingearth,resultinginthedayandnightcycle.However,wearetoldexactlywherethislightcamefrom.Thewordfor“light”inGenesis1:3meansthesubstanceoflightthatwascreated.Then,ondayfourinGenesis1:14–19wearetoldofthecreationofthesunwhichwas to be the source of light from that time onward. The sunwascreatedtorulethedaythatalreadyexisted.Thedaystayedthesame.Itmerelyhadanewlightsource.Thefirstthreedaysofcreation(beforethesun)werethesametypeofdaysasthethreedayswiththesun.PerhapsGoddeliberatelyleftthecreationofthesununtilthefourthdaybecauseHeknewthatdownthroughtheagescultureswouldtrytoworshipthesunasthesourceoflife.Notonlythis,moderntheoriestellusthesuncamebeforetheearth.GodisshowingusthatHemadetheearthandlighttostartwith,thatHecansustainitwithitsdayandnightcycleandthatthesunwascreatedonDayFourasatoolofHistobethebeareroflightfromthattime.ProbablyoneofthemajorreasonspeopletendnottotakethedaysofGenesis

asordinarydaysisbecausetheybelievethatscientistshaveprovedtheearthtobe billions of years old. But this is not true. There is no absolute age-datingmethodtodeterminehowoldtheearthis.Besidesthis, thereismuchevidenceconsistentwithabeliefinayoungagefortheearth,perhapsonlythousandsofyears.Incidentally,thosewhosaythatadaycouldbemillionsofyearsmustanswer

thequestion,“Whatisanight?”

Whysixdays?God is an infinite being. He has infinite power, infinite knowledge, infinite

wisdom.Obviously,Godcould thenmakeanythingHedesired.Hecouldhavecreatedthewholeuniverse,theearthandallitcontainsinnotimeatall.PerhapsthequestionweshouldbeaskingiswhydidGodtakeaslongassixdays?Afterall, six days is a peculiar period for an infinite being to make anything. Theanswer can be found in Exodus 20:11. Exodus 20 contains the TenCommandments, and it shouldbe remembered that thesecommandmentswerewrittenonstonebythevery“fingerofGod.”InExodusweread:“AndhegaveuntoMoses, when he hadmade an end of communingwith him uponmountSinai, two tablesof testimony, tablesof stone,writtenwith the fingerofGod”(Exodus31:18).Thefourthcommandment,inverse9ofchapter20,tellsusthatwearetoworkforsixdaysandrestforone.Thejustificationforthisisgiveninverse11:“ForinsixdaystheLordmadeheavenandearth,thesea,andallthatin themis,andrested theseventhday;wherefore theLordblessed thesabbathday, and hallowed it.” This is a direct reference to God’s Creation Week inGenesis1.Tobeconsistent(andwemustbe),whateverisusedasthemeaningoftheword“day”inGenesis1mustalsobeusedhere.Ifyouaregoingtosaytheword“day”meansalongperiodoftimeinGenesis,thenithasbeenalreadyshown that the only way this can be is in the sense of the “day” being anindefiniteorindeterminateperiodoftime,notadefiniteperiodoftime.Thus,thesense of Exodus 20:9–11 would have to be “six indefinite periods shalt thoulaborandrestaseventhindefiniteperiod.”This,however,makesnosenseatall.Byacceptingthedaysasordinarydays,weunderstandthatGodistellingusHeworkedforsixordinarydaysandrestedoneordinarydaytosetapatternforman—thepatternofourseven-dayweekwhichwestillhavetoday.

Day-ageinconsistenciesThere are many inconsistencies in accepting the days in Genesis as long

periodsoftime.Forinstance,wearetoldinGenesis1:26–28thatGodmadethefirstman(Adam)onthesixthday.Adamlivedthroughtherestofthesixthdayand through the seventhday.Weare told inGenesis5:5 thathediedwhenhewas 930 years old. (We are not still in the seventh day as some peoplemisconstrue,forGenesis2:2tellsusGod“rested”fromHisworkofcreation,notthatHe is resting fromHisworkofcreation.) If eachdaywas, forexample,amillion years, then there are real problems. In fact, if each day were only athousandyearslong,thisstillmakesnosenseofAdam’sageatdeatheither.

AdayisasathousandyearsBut some then refer to 2 Peter 3:8 which tells us: “But, beloved, be not

ignorantofthisonething,thatonedayiswiththeLordasathousandyears,anda thousand years as one day.” This verse is used by many who teach, byinferenceatleast,thatthedaysinGenesismusteachbeathousandyearslong.This reasoning, however, is quite wrong. Turning to Psalm 90:4 we read asimilarverse:“Forathousandyearsinthysightarebutasyesterdaywhenitispast,andasawatch in thenight.”Inboth2Peter (3)andPsalm90 thewholecontext is thatGod isneither limitedbynaturalprocessesnorby time.To thecontrary,Godis“outside”time,forHealso“created”time.NeitherversereferstothedaysofcreationinGenesis,fortheyaredealingwithGodnotbeingboundby time. In 2 Peter 3, the context is in relation to Christ’s Second Coming,pointing out the fact that with God a day is just like a thousand years or athousandyearsisjustlikeoneday.Heisoutsideoftime.ThishasnothingtodowiththedaysofcreationinGenesis.Further, in2Peter3:8 theword“day” iscontrastedwith“a thousandyears.”

Theword“day”thushasaliteralmeaningwhichenablesittobecontrastedwith“athousandyears.”Itcouldnotbecontrastedwith“athousandyears”ifitdidn’thavealiteralmeaning.Thus,thethrustoftheApostle’smessageisthatGodcandoinaveryshorttimewhatmenor“nature”wouldrequireaverylongtimetoaccomplish, if they could accomplish it at all. It is interesting to note thatevolutionists try to make out that the chance, random processes of “nature”requiredmillionsofyearstoproduceman.ManyChristianshaveacceptedthesemillionsofyears,addedthemtotheBibleandthensaidthatGodtookmillionsofyearstomakeeverything.However,thepointof2Peter3:8isthatGodisnotlimitedbytime,whereasevolutionrequirestime(averygreatdealofit!).

DaysandyearsInGenesis1:14wereadthatGodsaid,“Lettherebelightsinthefirmamentof

theheaventodivide thedayfromthenight;andlet thembeforsigns,andforseasons,andfordays,andyears.”Iftheword“day”hereisnotaliteralday,thentheword“years”beingusedinthesameversewouldbemeaningless.

DayandcovenantTurningtoJeremiah33:25–26weread:“ThussaiththeLord;Ifmycovenant

benotwithdayandnight,andifIhavenotappointedtheordinancesofheavenandearth;thenwillIcastawaytheseedofJacob,andDavidmyservantsothatI

willnot takeanyofhisseedtoberulersover theseedofAbraham,Isaac,andJacob;forIwillcause theircaptivity toreturn,andhavemercyon them.”TheLordistellingJeremiahthatHehasacovenantwiththedayandthenightwhichcannotbebroken,and it is related to thepromise to thedescendantsofDavid,includingtheOnewhowaspromisedtotakethethrone(Christ).ThiscovenantbetweenGodandthedayandnightbeganinGenesis1,forGodfirstdefinedandinventeddayandnightwhenHespokethemintoexistence.ThereisnoclearoriginfordayandnightintheScriptureotherthanGenesis1.

Therefore, this must be the beginning of this covenant. So if this covenantbetweenthedayandthenightdoesnotexistwhenGodclearlysaysitdoes(i.e.,if you do not take Genesis 1 to literally mean six ordinary days), then thispromisegivenherethroughJeremiahisonshakyground.

Doesthelengthofthedaymatter?Finally,doesitreallymatterwhetherweacceptthemasordinarydaysornot?

The answer is a most definite “Yes!” It is really a principle of how oneapproachestheBible.Forinstance,ifwedon’tacceptthemasordinarydaysthenwehavetoaskthequestion,“Whatarethey?”Theansweris“Wedon’tknow.”Ifweapproachthedaysinthismanner,thentobeconsistentweshouldapproachotherpassagesofGenesisinthesameway.Forinstance,whenitsaysGodtookdustandmadeAdam—whatdoes thismean?If itdoesnotmeanwhat issays,then we don’t know what it means! We should take Genesis literally.Furthermore,itshouldbenotedthatyoucannot“interpretliterally,”fora“literalinterpretation” is a contradiction in terms. You either take it literally or youinterpret it! It is important to realize we should take it literally unless it isobviouslysymbolic,andwhenitissymboliceitherthecontextwillmakeitquiteclearorwewillbetoldinthetext.Ifapersonsaysthatwedonotknowwhattheword“day”meansinGenesis,

cananotherpersonwhosays theyare literaldaysbeaccusedofbeingwrong?Theansweris“No,”becausethepersonwhoacceptsthemasordinarydaysdoesknowwhattheymean.Itisthepersonwhodoesnotknowwhatthedaysmeanwhocannotaccuseanyoneofbeingwrong.Peopletrytomaketheword“day”saysomethingelsebecausetheyaretrying

to make room for the long ages of evolutionary geology. This doesn’t workbecause these supposed ages are represented by fossils showing death andstruggle,andthusyouareleftwiththesameoldproblemofdeathandstrugglebeforeAdam.TheBibleclearlyindicatesthattherewasnodeathandsuffering

beforeAdam’ssin.WhenpeopleacceptatfacevaluewhatGenesisisteachingandacceptthedays

as ordinary days, they will have no problem understanding what the rest ofGenesisisallabout.“ForinsixdaystheLordmadeheavenandearth,thesea,andallthatinthemis,andrestedtheseventhday;whereforetheLordblessedthesabbathday,andhallowedit”(Exodus20:11).

DidBibleAuthorsBelieveinaLiteralGenesis?TerryMortensonAnyonewhohasreadtheBibleverymuchwillrecognizethattherearedifferentkindsof literature in theOld andNewTestaments.There areparables, poetry,prophetic visions, dreams, epistles, proverbs, and historical narrative,with themajority being the latter. So, how should we interpret Genesis 1–11? Is ithistory?Isitmythology?Isitsymbolicpoetry?Isitallegory?Isitaparable?Isitapropheticvision?Isitamixtureofthesekindsofliteratureorsomekindofuniquegenre?Anddoesitreallymatteranyway?Wewillcomebacktothelastquestionlater,butsufficeittosayherethatthe

correct conclusion on genre of literature is foundational to the question of thecorrect interpretation. If we interpret something literally which the authorintended to be understood figuratively, then we will misunderstand the text.WhenJesussaid“Iamthedoor”(John10:9),HedidnotmeanthatHewasmadeofwoodwithhingesattachedtoHisside.Conversely,ifweinterpretsomethingfigurativelythattheauthorintendedtobetakenliterally,wewillerr.WhenJesussaid,“TheSonofManisabouttobebetrayedintothehandsofmen,andtheywillkillHim,andthethirddayHewillberaisedup”(Matthew17:22–23),HeclearlymeantitjustasliterallyasifIsaidtomywife,“Margie,I’mgoingtofillupthegastankwithgasandwillbebackinafewminutes.”Therearemanylinesofevidencewecouldconsidertodeterminethegenreof

Genesis1–11,suchastheinternalevidencewithinthebookofGenesisandhowthe church has viewed these chapters throughout church history. But in thischapter we want to answer the question, “How did the other biblical authors(besides Moses, who wrote Genesis1) and Jesus interpret them?” From myreadingandexperienceitappearsthatmostpeoplewhoconsiderthequestionofhow to interpret the early chapters of Genesis have never asked, much lessanswered,thatquestion.

MosesasdepictedintheCreationMuseum’sbiblicalauthorityroom.

Tobegin,considerwhatGodsaysaboutthewayHespoketoMosesincontrasttothewayHespoketootherprophets.InNumbers12:6–8weread:

ThenHesaid,“HearnowMywords:ifthereisaprophetamongyou,I,theLORD,makeMyselfknowntohiminavision;Ispeaktohiminadream.NotsowithMyservantMoses;heisfaithfulinallMyhouse.Ispeakwithhimfacetoface,evenplainly,andnotindarksayings;AndheseestheformoftheLORD.WhythenwereyounotafraidtospeakagainstMyservantMoses?”So,GodsaysthatHespoke“plainly”toMoses,notin“darksayings,”thatis,

not inobscure language.That strongly suggests thatweshouldnotbe lookingformysterious, hard-to-understandmeanings inwhatMoseswrote.Rather,weshould read Genesis as the straightforward history that it appears to be. AnexaminationofhowtherestoftheBibleinterpretsGenesisconfirmsthis.

OldTestamentauthorsandtheiruseofGenesisWhenweturntootherOldTestamentauthors,thereareonlyafewreferences

toGenesis1–11.Buttheyalltreatthosechaptersasliteralhistory.The Jews were very careful about genealogies. For example, in Nehemiah

7:61–64 thepeoplewhowanted toserve in the rebuilt templeneeded toprovethattheyweredescendedfromthepriestlylineofAaron.Thosewhocouldnotprove this could not serve as priests. 1 Chronicles 1–8 gives a long series ofgenealogiesallthewaybacktoAdam.Chapter1(verses1–28)hasnomissingoraddednamesinthegenealogicallinksfromAdamtoAbraham,comparedtoGenesis 5 and 11. The author(s) of 1 Chronicles obviously took thesegenealogiesashistoricallyaccurate.Outside of Genesis 6–11, Psalm 29:10 contains the only other use of the

Hebrew word mabbul (translated “flood”).2 God literally sat as King at theglobalFloodofNoah.Ifthateventwasnothistorical,thestatementinthisversewouldhavenorealforceandthepromiseofverse11willgivelittlecomforttoGod’speople.

David,thewriterofmanyofthepsalms,fromaCreationMuseumdisplay.

Psalm 33:6–9 affirms that God created supernaturally by HisWord, just as

Genesis 1 says repeatedly. Creatures came into existence instantly when Godsaid,“Let therebe . . .”Goddidnothave towait formillionsor thousandsofyearsforlightordrylandorplantsandanimalsorAdamtoappear.“Hespokeanditwasdone;Hecommandedanditstoodfast”(Psalm33:9).Psalm104:5and19speakofeventsduringCreationWeek.3Butverses6–9in

this psalm give additional information to that provided in Genesis 8, whichdescribes how thewaters receded off the earth at the end of the Flood.4 Thepsalmistisclearlydescribinghistoricalevents.In beautiful poetic form, Psalm 136 recountsmany ofGod’smighty acts in

history,beginningwithstatementsaboutsomeofHiscreativeworksinGenesis1.

IsaiahrecordedGod’sWords,notmythicaltales.

InIsaiah54:9Godsays(echoingthepromiseofPsalm104:9) toIsrael,“ForthisislikethewatersofNoahtoMe;forasIhaveswornthatthewatersofNoahwouldnolongercovertheearth,sohaveIswornthatIwouldnotbeangrywithyou,norrebukeyou.”ThepromiseofGodwouldhavenoforce,iftheaccountofNoah’sFloodwasnothistoricallytrue.NoonewouldbelieveintheSecondComingofChristifthepromiseofitwasgivenas,“JustasSantaClauscomesfromtheNorthPoleinhissleighpulledbyreindeeronChristmasEveandputspresentsforthewholefamilyundertheChristmastreeineachhome,soJesusiscoming again as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.” In fact, the analogywouldconvincepeoplethattheSecondComingisamyth.In Ezekiel 14:14–20 God refers repeatedly to Noah, Daniel, and Job and

clearlyindicatesthattheywereallequallyhistoricalandrighteousmen.Thereisno reason to doubt thatGodmeant that everything theBible says about thesemenishistoricallyaccurate.

NewTestamentauthors’viewofGenesisTheNewTestamenthasmanymoreexplicitreferencestotheearlychaptersof

Genesis.ThegenealogiesofJesuspresentedinMatthew1:1–17andLuke3:23–38show

thatGenesis1–11ishistoricalnarrative.ThesegenealogiesmustallbeequallyhistoricalorelsewemustconcludethatJesuswasdescendedfromamythandtherefore He would not have been a real human being and therefore not ourSaviorandLord.5

PaulreliedheavilyonaGenesisasplainlywritten.

PaulbuilthisdoctrineofsinandsalvationonthefactthatsinanddeathenteredtheworldthroughAdam.Jesus,astheLastAdam,cameintotheworldtobring

righteousness and life to people and to undo the damaging work of the firstAdam(Romans5:12–19;1Corinthians15:21–22,15:45–47.).Paulaffirmedthatthe serpentdeceivedEve,notAdam(2Corinthians11:3;1Timothy2:13–14).HetookGenesis1–2literallybyaffirmingthatAdamwascreatedfirstandEvewasmadefromthebodyofAdam(1Corinthians11:8–9).InRomans1:20PaulindicatedthatpeoplehaveseentheevidenceofGod’sexistenceandsomeofHisattributes since the creation of theworld.6Thatmeans that Paul believed thatmanwas right there at the beginning of history, not billions of years after thebeginning.PetersimilarlybasedsomeofhisteachingsontheliteralhistoryofGenesis1–

11.In1Peter3:20;2Peter2:4–9,3:3–7,hereferredtotheFlood.Heconsideredthe account of Noah and the Flood just as historical as the account of thejudgment of Sodom andGomorrah (Genesis 19). He affirmed that only eightpeopleweresavedandthattheFloodwasglobal,justasthefuturejudgmentatthe Second Coming of Christ will be. He argued that scoffers will deny theSecondComingbecausetheydenythesupernaturalCreationandNoah’sFlood.AndPeter toldhisreaders thatscofferswilldothisbecausetheyarereasoningonthebasisofthephilosophicalassumptionwhichtodaywecalluniformitariannaturalism:“allthingscontinueastheywerefromthebeginningofcreation”(2Peter3:4).7

ThewordsofJohnandPeterdemonstratetheirtrustinthehistoricityoftheGenesisaccounts.

Ithasbeenobjectedthattheapostlesdidnotknowthedifferencebetweentruthandmyth.Butthisisalsofalse.In1Corinthians10:1–11Paulreferstoanumberof passages from the Pentateuch where miracles are described and heemphasizesinverses6and11that“thesethingshappened.”In2Timothy4:3–4Paulwrote:Forthetimewillcomewhentheywillnotenduresounddoctrine,butaccordingtotheirowndesires,becausetheyhaveitchingears,theywillheapupforthemselvesteachers;andtheywillturntheirearsawayfromthetruth,andbeturnedasidetofables.TheGreekwordtranslatedhereas“fables”ismuthos,fromwhichwegetour

Englishword“myth.”Incontrastto“truth”or“sounddoctrine,”thesameGreekword is used in 1 Timothy 1:4, 4:7; Titus 1:14; and 2 Peter 1:16. In a first-centuryworldfilledwithGreek,Roman,andJewishmyths,theapostlesclearlyknewthedifferencebetweentruthandmyth.AndtheyconstantlyaffirmedthattheWordofGodcontainstruth,notmyth.

ChristandHisuseofGenesisIn John 10:34–35 Jesus defendedHis claim to deity by quoting fromPsalm

82:6and thenasserting that“Scripturecannotbebroken.”That is, theBible isfaithful, reliable, and truthful. The Scriptures cannot be contradicted orconfounded.InLuke24:25–27JesusrebukedHisdisciplesfornotbelievingallthattheprophetshavespoken(whichHeequateswith“alltheScriptures”).So,inJesus’sview,allScriptureistrustworthyandshouldbebelieved.Anotherway that Jesus revealedHis complete trust in theScriptureswasby

treating as historical fact the accounts in the Old Testament, which mostcontemporary people think are unbelievable mythology. These historicalaccounts includeAdamandEve as the firstmarried couple (Matthew19:3–6;Mark 10:3–9), Abel as the first prophet who was martyred (Luke 11:50–51),Noah and theFlood (Matthew24:38–39), the experiencesofLot andhiswife(Luke 17:28–32), the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah (Matthew 10:15),MosesandtheserpentinthewildernesswanderingsaftertheexodusfromEgypt(John 3:14), Moses and the manna from heaven (John 6:32–33, 6:49), themiraclesofElijah (Luke4:25–27), and Jonah in thebig fish (Matthew12:40–41).AsWenhamhascompellinglyargued,8Jesusdidnotallegorizetheseaccounts

but took them as straightforward history, describing events that actually

happened, just as the Old Testament describes. Jesus used these accounts toteachHis disciples that the events ofHis owndeath, resurrection, and secondcomingwould likewise certainly happen in time-space reality. Jesus indicatedthattheScripturesareessentiallyperspicuous(orclear):eleventimesthegospelwriters record Him saying, “Have you not read . . .?”9 And thirty times HedefendedHisteachingbysaying“Itiswritten.”10HerebukedHislistenersfornotunderstandingandbelievingwhatthetextplainlysays.Besides the above-mentioned evidence that Jesus took Genesis 1–11 as

straightforward reliable history, the Gospel writers record three importantstatementsthatrevealJesus’sworldview.Carefulanalysisoftheseverses(Mark10:6,13:19–20;Luke11:50–51)shows thatJesusbelieved thatAdamandEvewereinexistenceessentiallyat thesametimethatGodcreatedeverythingelse(andAbelwasveryclosetothattime),notmillionsorbillionsofyearsafterGodmadetheotherthings.11ThisshowsthatJesustookthecreationdaysasliteral24-hourdays.So,everythingJesussaidshowsthatwecanjustifiablycallHimayoung-earthcreationist.IthasbeenobjectedthatinthesestatementsJesuswasjustaccommodatingthe

culturalbeliefsofHisday.Butthisisfalseforfourreasons.First,Jesuswasthetruth (John 14:6), and therefore He always spoke the truth. No deceitful ormisleadingwordsevercamefromHismouth(1Peter2:22).Evenhisenemiessaid,“Teacher,weknowthatyouaretruthful,anddefer tonoone;foryouarenot partial to any, but teach the way of God in truth” (Mark 12:14). Second,JesustaughtwithauthorityonthebasisofGod’sWord,whichHecalled“truth”(John 17:17), not as the scribes and Pharisees taught based on their traditions(Matthew7:28–29).Third,Jesusrepeatedlyandboldlyconfrontedallkindsofwrongthinkingand

behaviorinHislisteners’lives,inspiteofthethreatofpersecutionfordoingso(Matthew 22:29; John 2:15–16, 3:10, 4:3–4, 4:9; Mark 7:9–13). And finally,JesusemphasizedthefoundationalimportanceofbelievingwhatMoseswroteinastraight-forwardway(John5:45;Luke16:31,24:25–27,24:44–45;John3:12;Matthew17:5).

Whyisthisimportant?We should take Genesis 1–11 as straightforward, accurate, literal history

because Jesus, the apostles, and all the other biblical writers did so. There isabsolutelynobiblicalbasisfortakingthesechaptersasanykindofnon-literal,figurativegenreof literature.That shouldbe reason enough forus to interpret

Genesis1–11inthesameliteralway.Buttherearesomeotherimportantreasonstodoso.Onlya literal,historicalapproach toGenesis1–11givesaproper foundation

for thegospel and the futurehopeof thegospel. Jesuscame into theworld tosolvetheproblemofsinthatstartedinreal,time-spacehistoryintherealGardenofEdenwithtworealpeoplecalledAdamandEveandarealserpentthatspoketoEve.12ThesinofAdamandEveresultedinspiritualandphysicaldeathforthem, but also a divine curse on the once “very good” all of creation (seeGenesis1:31and3:14–19).JesusiscomingagaintoliberateallChristiansandthecreationitselffromthatbondagetocorruption(Romans8:18–25).Thentherewill be anewheaven and anewearth,where righteousnessdwells andwheresin, death, andnatural evilswill be nomore.Anon-literal readingofGenesisdestroysthismessageoftheBibleandultimatelyisanassaultonthecharacterofGod.13Genesis is also foundational tomanyother importantdoctrines in the restof

theBible,suchasmalelovingheadshipinthehomeandthechurch.

ConclusionThe Bible is crystal clear. We must believe Genesis 1–11 as literal history

becauseJesus,theNewTestamentapostles,andtheOldTestamentprophetsdid,andbecausetheseopeningchaptersofGenesisarefoundationaltotherestoftheBible.Asweandmanyothercreationistshavealwayssaid,apersondoesn’thaveto

believe thatGenesis 1–11 is literally true to be saved.Weare savedwhenwerepentofoursinsand trustsolely in thedeathandresurrectionofJesusChristforoursalvation(John3:16;Romans10:9–10).ButifwetrustinChristandyetdisbelieveGenesis1–11,wearebeinginconsistentandarenotfaithfulfollowersofourLord.GodsaidthroughtheprophetIsaiah(66:1–2):ThussaystheLORD:“HeavenisMythrone,andearthisMyfootstool.WhereisthehousethatyouwillbuildMe?AndwhereistheplaceofMyrest?ForallthosethingsMyhandhasmade,andallthosethingsexist,saystheLORD.ButonthisonewillIlook:onhimwhoispoorandofacontritespirit,andwhotremblesatMyword.”Willyoubeonewhotremblesat thewordsofGod,rather thanbelievingthe

fallibleanderroneouswordsofevolutionistswhodevelophypothesesandmythsthatdenyGod’sWord?Ultimately, thisquestionof theproper interpretationof

Genesis1–11isaquestionoftheauthorityofGod’sWord.

Endnotes1.ThatMoseswastheauthorofthefirstfivebooks(calledthePentateuch)oftheOldTestamentisclearfromScripture

itself.ThePentateuchexplicitlyclaimsthisinExodus17:14,24:4,34:27;Numbers33:1–2;Deuteronomy31:9–11.OtherOTbooksaffirmthatMoseswrotethesebookswhichbythetimeofJoshuabecameknowncollectivelyas“theLaw,”“thebookoftheLaw,”or“theLawofMoses”:Joshua1:8,8:31–32;1Kings2:3;2Kings14:6(quotingDeuteronomy24:16),21:8;Ezra6:18;Nehemiah13:1;Daniel9:11–13;Malachi4:4.TheNewTestamentagreesinMatthew19:8;John5:46–47,7:19;Acts3:22(quotingfromDeuteronomy18:15);Romans10:5(quotingfromLeviticus18:5),andMark12:26(referringtoExodus3:6).JewishtraditionalsoascribesthePentateuchtoMoses.Also,thetheoriesofliberaltheologianswhodenytheMosaicauthorshipofthesebooksarefraughtwithfalseassumptionsandillogicalreasoning.SeeGleasonL.Archer,Jr.,ASurveyofOldTestamentIntroduction(Chicago:MoodyPress,1985),pp.109–113.Returntotext.

2.TherearefourotherHebrewwordsthatareusedintheOTtodescribelesser,localizedfloods.Returntotext.

3.MostofthispsalmisreferringtoaspectsofGod’screationasitexistedatthetimethepsalmistwaswriting.Contrarytowhatsomeold-earthcreationistsassert,Psalm104isnota“creationaccount.”Returntotext.

4.ThattheseversesdonotrefertoCreationWeekisevidentfromthepromisereflectedinverse9,whichechoesthepromiseofGenesis9:11–17.GodmadenosuchpromiseonthethirddayofCreationWeekwhenHemadedrylandappear.Returntotext.

5.InMatthew1:1–17,Matthewhasclearlyleftoutsomenamesinhisgenealogy(foraliterarypurpose),asseenbycomparingittotheOldTestamenthistory,butallthenamesareequallyhistoricalallthewaybacktoAbraham,whoisfirstmentionedinGenesis11.Luke3:23–38tracesthelineageofJesusbacktoAdam.ThereisnoreasontothinkthereareanymissingnamesinLuke’sgenealogy,because1)hewasconcernedaboutgivingustheexacttruth(Luke1:4)and2)hisgenealogyfromAdamtoAbrahammatches1Chron.1:1–28andGenesis5and11,andthereisnogoodreasonforconcludingthatGenesishasmissingnames.SeeKenHamandLarryPierce,“WhoBegatWhom?ClosingtheGapinGenesisGenealogies,”www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/who-begat-whom,andTravisR.Freeman,“DotheGenesis5and11GenealogiesContainGaps?”inTerryMortensonandThaneH.Ury,eds.,ComingtoGripswithGenesis(GreenForest,AR:MasterBooks,2008),pp.283–314.Returntotext.

6.TheNewKingJamesandtheKingJamesVersiontranslatetheGreekinthisverseas“fromthecreationoftheworld.”Theword“from”inEnglishhasasimilarrangeofmeaningsastheGreekword(apo)thatittranslateshere.Thereareanumberofreasonstotakeitinatemporalsense,meaning“since”astheNAS,NIV,andESVtranslateit.Forafullerdiscussionofthisimportantverse,seeRonMinton,“ApostolicWitnesstoGenesisCreationandtheFlood,”inTerryMortensonandThaneH.Ury,eds.,ComingtoGripswithGenesis(GreenForest,AR:MasterBooks,2008),pp.351–354.Returntotext.

7.FormorediscussionofthisseeTerryMortenson,“PhilosophicalNaturalismandtheAgeoftheEarth:AreTheyRelated?”TheMaster’sSeminaryJournal15no.1(2004):71–92,onlineatwww.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/naturalismChurch.asp.Returntotext.

8.JohnWenham,ChristandtheBible(DownersGrove,IL:InterVarsityPress,1973),pp.11–37.Returntotext.

9.IntheseinstancesJesusreferredtoGenesis1–2,Exodus3–6,1Samuel21:6,Psalm8:2,Psalm118:22,andtounspecifiedLeviticallaw—inotherwords,topassagesfromthehistoricalnarrative,theLaw,andthepoetryofScripture.Returntotext.

10.PassagesHespecificallycitedwerefromallfivebooksofthePentateuch,Psalms,Isaiah,Jeremiah,Zechariah,andMalachi.Interestingly,inthetemptationofJesus,SatanusedScriptureliterallyand,inresponse,JesusdidnotimplythattheliteralinterpretationofSatanwaswrong.RatherHecorrectedSatan’smisapplicationofthetext’sliteralmeaningbyquotinganothertext,whichHetookliterally(seeMatthew4:6–7).Returntotext.

11.SeeTerryMortenson,“Jesus’ViewoftheAgeoftheEarth,”inTerryMortensonandThaneH.Ury,eds.,ComingtoGripswithGenesis(GreenForest,AR:MasterBooks,2008),pp.315–346.Returntotext.

12.WhyChristianshavetroublebelievingGenesis3whenitspeaksofatalkingserpentisamysterytome.Wehavetalkingparrotstoday,whichinvolvesnomiracles.AndiftheChristianbelievesinanymiraclesoftheBible,thenhemustbelievethatBalaam’sdonkeywasusedbyGodtospeaktothefalseprophet(Numbers22:28).SinceSatanisasupernaturalbeingwhocandosupernaturalthings(e.g.,2Corinthians11:11–13;Matthew4:1–11;2Thessalonians2:8–9),itisnotdifficultatalltounderstandorbelievethathecouldspeakthroughaserpenttodeceiveEve(cf.2Corinthians11:3;Revelation12:9).Returntotext.

13.SeeKenHamandJamesStambaugh,“WhenceComethDeath?ABiblicalTheologyofPhysicalDeathandNatural

Evil,”andThaneH.Ury,“Luther,Calvin,andWesleyontheGenesisofNaturalEvil:RecoveringLostRubricsforDefendingaVeryGoodCreation,”inTerryMortensonandThaneH.Ury,eds.,ComingtoGripswithGenesis(GreenForest,AR:MasterBooks,2008),pp.373–398and399–424,respectively.Returntotext.

Eisegesis:AGenesisVirusKenHamAdeadly virus is sweeping through churchmembersworldwide. InvestigatorshavefoundthatthereasonthisvirusisfairlyspecifictochurchattendeesisthatithasfoundsafeharbourinmanyseminariesandBiblecolleges.Intheseinstitutions,thevirusistransmittedtostudentswhoeventuallypassit

on to unsuspecting church members (especially if they become pastors).Although somepeople are “immune” to the effects of the virus,most are not.Thevirushasbeencalled“TheEisegesisVirus,”andhasbeenfoundresponsibleforthe“death”ofmanychurchmembers.Thisreportsummarizesthenatureofthis“virus”thatdoesnotaffectaperson’s

physicalbody,butinfectstheirthinkinginsuchawaythatpeoplearenolongerable toconsistentlydetermineabsolute truth. Iconsider thisvirus tobeoneofthemostdangerousintheworldtoday.Thereis,however,apowerfulvaccinethatcancounteracttheeisegesis“virus”

and even reverse its destructive effects on thinking. The vaccine, called“exegesis,” is readily available, but sadly is not recognized by most churchleaders.NowIamnotreferringtoabiologicalvirusoraphysicalvaccine,buttowhatI

couldcalla“spiritualvirus”—awayofthinkingthathastakenoverthemindsofmany church leaders and most church members. This has caused them toincorrectlyinterpretGod’sholyWord.Thisoftenresultsindoubtabout,orevenunbelief in,biblicaldoctrines.Ithasplacedastumblingblockbeforepeopleintheworld,onewhich results in themscoffingat,andnotbeingwilling to takeseriously,thewordsofScripture.Theantidote is a “spiritualvaccine” that teaches away to think that enables

people to “interpret” God’s Word correctly and believe and understand thisspecial revelation of absolute truth. As a result, people in the world arechallenged, and many hearts are changed in regard to their attitude towardsGod’sWordandthegospelofJesusChrist.

Theeisegesis“virus”TheRandomHouseWebster’sUnabridgedDictionarydefines“eisegesis”as:

“an interpretation, esp.ofScripture, that expresses the interpreter’sown ideas,bias,orthelike,ratherthanthemeaningofthetext.”

Thus, when someone reads something into Scripture—this would be anexampleofeisegesis.Forinstance,nowheredoestheBibleeverspeakofbillionsofyears.InGenesis1,thewordday(yom)incontext,asusedforthesixDaysofCreation(withanumberandthephraseeveningandmorning),meansthesedaysareapproximately24-hourperiods—ordinarydays.However, probably the majority of church leaders insist these days could

representbillionsofyears—thisis“eisegesis”,asthebillionsofyearsisabelieffromoutsideofScripturethatisreadintoScripture(resultingintheclearwordsofScripturebeingreinterpretedonthebasisoftheseoutsideideas).Sadly, this is the“virus”that infectsmuchof thechurch.Churchleadersand

thus church members have, by and large, developed a way of thinking thatacceptsmanyaspectsofwhatthe“world”teachesconcerningbillionsofyears,evolutionetc.,andthatreadstheseideasintoGod’sWord.The“world”thenviewsthechurchasnotbelievingGod’sWordaswritten,but

asacceptingthe“world’s”theoriesastruthandreinterpretingGod’sWordtofit.Thus,the“world”doesnotreallyhavearespectfortheBibleandgenerallydoesnotlistentothemessageoftheGospelthatispreachedfromthisbook.

Many church members (and particularly their children and subsequentgenerations)recognizethatiftheBiblehastobereinterpretedonthebasisofthe“world’s”teachings,thentheBibleisnotabsolutetruth.WhentheyaretaughttouseeisegesisinGenesis,theybegintoconsistentlyapplythissameinterpretationmethodtotherestoftheBible.Ultimately,theystoptakingtheBibleseriously,andwithinagenerationortwo,peoplebegintorejecttheChristianfaithandstopattendingchurch.Thus,weseethe“death”ofmanychurchmembers.However,thereisapowerfulsolutiontothissituationthatcanresultinsaving

faithformany,andrestorationofconfidenceforGod’speopleinGod’sWord.

Theexegesis“vaccine”TheRandomHouseWebster’sUnabridgedDictionarydefines “exegesis” as:

“critical explanationor interpretationof a text or portionof a text, esp. of theBible.”

Thisisoftencalledthe“grammatical-historical”interpretationmethod.Thus,whensomeonereadsthewordsofScripture,andinterpretsthemonthe

basisofcontextandthetypeofliteratureetc.,thenthiswouldbeanexampleof“exegesis”—readingoutofScripturewhatthewriterclearlyintendedtoexpress.

InGenesis1,theHebrewwordforday(yom),asusedforeachofthesixDaysofCreation,wouldbe lookedat in regard tocontextand the typeof literature.Genesis is written in typical Hebrew historical narrative—this is important tounderstand when interpreting the words of this book. Any reputable Hebrewlexicon (one-way dictionary) will list the different meanings given to a word(like“day”),andthevariouscontextsthatdeterminethesemeanings.Onewillfindthatwheneveryom(day)isqualifiedbyanumberorthephrase

eveningandmorning,italwaysmeansanordinaryday.Thus,criticallylookingat the text and then reading out of Scripture, one cannot come to any otherconclusionexceptthatthesedayswereordinary(24-hour)days.When church members and their subsequent generations are trained in this

method of thinking (interpreting Scripture in context), they have a respect forGod’sWordandthenjudgethe“world’s”fallibletheoriesonthebasisofwhattheWordofGodclearlystates.WhentheyaretaughttouseexegesisinGenesis,theyusuallyconsistentlyapplythismethodofinterpretationthroughouttherestoftheBible.Theyhaveasolidfaithinabsolutetruth.Especiallywhentheythenseehow,startingwiththehistorygivenintheBible,theycanmakebettersenseofthesameevidencewhichwaspreviouslyusedtounderminetheBible.Theyarenottossed“toandfro”bytheworld’sfallibleideas,butbyandlargestandfirmontheauthoritativeWord.The“world”thenrecognizesthatChristiansdotakeGod’sWordseriouslyand

believeitaswritten.Asaresult,the“world”isoftenchallengedtoquestionitsfallibletheoriesandlistentoGod’sWord—insteadoftheotherwayaround.Understandingthedifferencebetween“eisegesis”and“exegesis”isreallythe

keytotheeffectivenessofthechurchintoday’sculture.

Which“key”areyouusing?All of this can be summed up by using the analogy of keys. These two

interpretativemethodsarereallytwodifferentkeys:These two keys unlock doors—each of which results in very different

consequenceswhenopened.Thedoorsrepresentwords—inthiscase,thewordsfrom the Bible. To illustrate the result of using these different keys, the twodoorswillrepresenttheHebrewwordforday,yom.

The“exegesiskey”unlocksdoor#1

Thismethodof interpretation involvesmakingGod’sWord theauthorityandletting its words speak to us—reading out of Scripture. Thus, starting withGenesis,onewouldtakethewordsof thisbookaswritten.Yom inthiscontextwouldbetakenasexactlywhatitwasmeanttoconvey—anordinaryday.If one consistently applies this samemethodof interpretation throughout the

Scriptures,onewouldhavenoproblemaccepting theVirginalConceptionandthe literal bodily Resurrection of Christ. Such teachings come only from therevelationofScripture—thewordsoftheBibletakenincontextaccordingtothetypeofliterature.ThisresultsinbelievingthewordsofScripture,notdoubtingthem,thusprovidingthebasisfortheChristianfaith.

The“eisegesiskey”unlocksdoor#2

Thismethodofinterpretationinvolvestakingman’sword(ideas,theories,etc.)fromoutsidetheBibleasabasisforreadingintoScripture.Thus,startingwithGenesis,onewould take thewordsof thisbook(like thewordday—yom)andinterprettheminthelightofman’sfallibletheories(e.g.,billionsofyears).Even

thoughthewordstakenaswrittenincontextcontradictthoseoutsideideas,theirmeaningmustbechanged toconform to them.This results inpeopledoubtingtheWordofGod,asitmeansonecan’ttrustthewordsaswritten.If a person then applies this interpretive method consistently throughout

Scripture, one would certainly doubt the rest of Genesis (for example, the“world” teaches there neverwas a global Flood), and ultimately other crucialdoctrines (science has never shown a virgin birth in humans, for instance),includingthebodilyResurrectionofChrist(sciencehasnevershownthatamancan be raised from the dead). This leads, consistently and logically, todisbelievingthewordsofScripture,andthusrejectingtheChristianfaiththatisbuiltontheBible.Sadly, the church is infectedwith the eisegesis “virus”—and as a result, the

ChristianworldviewthatwasoncesoprevalentintheWesternworldiswaning.God’s people need a good dose of the exegesis “vaccine” to restore the

foundationsofGod’sWordthattheChristianworldviewisbuiltupon.AsMartinLuthersaid:IhaveoftensaidthatwhoeverwouldstudyHolyScriptureshouldbesuretoseetoitthathestayswiththesimplewordsaslongashecanandbynomeansdepartsfromthemunlessanarticleoffaithcompelshimtounderstandthemdifferently.Forofthiswemustbecertain:nosimplerspeechhasbeenheardonEarththanwhatGodhasspoken.1

Endnote1.CompiledbyPlass,E.M.,WhatMartinLutherSays—APracticalIn-HomeAnthologyfortheActive,Concordia

PublishingHouse,StLouis,USA,p.93,1959.Returntotext.

IstheAgeoftheEarthaSalvationIssue?KenHamandBodieHodgeCanapersonbelieveinworldthatismillionsandbillionsofyearsoldandbeaChristian? First of all, let’s consider a few verses that summarize anunderstandingofthegospelandsalvation.Moreover,brethren,IdeclaretoyouthegospelwhichIpreachedtoyou,whichalsoyoureceivedandinwhichyoustand,bywhichalsoyouaresaved,ifyouholdfastthatwordwhichIpreachedtoyou—unlessyoubelievedinvain.ForIdeliveredtoyoufirstofallthatwhichIalsoreceived:thatChristdiedforoursinsaccordingtotheScriptures,andthatHewasburied,andthatHeroseagainthethirddayaccordingtotheScriptures.(1Corinthians15:1–4)AndifChristisnotrisen,yourfaithisfutile;youarestillinyoursins!(1Corinthians15:17)...ifyouconfesswithyourmouththeLordJesusandbelieveinyourheartthatGodhasraisedHimfromthedead,youwillbesaved.(Romans10:9)Jesusansweredandsaidtohim,“Mostassuredly,Isaytoyou,unlessoneisbornagain,hecannotseethekingdomofGod.”(John3:3)Ofcourse,wecouldcitenumerousotherpassages,butnotoneofthemstates

inanyway thatonehas tobelieve inayoungearth/universe tobesaved.Andwhenoneconsidersthelistofthosewho“willnotinheritthekingdomofGod”(1 Corinthians 6:9–10), we certainly do not see “old earthers” listed in suchpassages.ManygreatmenofGodwhoarenowwith theLordhavebelieved inanold

earth.SomeoftheseexplainedthemillionsofyearsbyadoptingtheclassicGapTheory. Others accepted a Day-Age Theory or positions such as TheisticEvolution,theFrameworkHypothesis,orProgressiveCreationism.Undoubtedly,Scripture plainly teaches salvation is conditionedupon faith in

Christ, with no requirement for what one believes about the age of theearth/universe.Inlightofthis,somepeopleassumethenthatforaChristian,itdoesnotmatterwhatonebelievesconcerningtheageoftheearthanduniverse.

However, even though it is not a salvation issue, a Christianwho believes inmillionsofyearsreapssevereconsequences.

TheissueofauthorityThe belief in millions of years does not come from Scripture, but from the

secularistfallibledatingmethodsusedtodatetheageoftheearthanduniverse.ToevenattempttofitmillionsofyearsintotheBible,onehastoinventagapoftimethat isnotallowedby the textor reinterpret thedaysofcreation(thatareobviouslyordinary-lengthdays in thecontextofGenesis1)as longperiodsoftime.Inotherwords,onehastoaddsomething(millionsofyears)fromoutsidethe

ScriptureintotheWordofGod.Thisisputtingman’sfallibleideasinauthorityover theWordofGod.Thusoneunlocksadoor todo this inotherareas. It isopening a door that others can push open further and further—which is whattendstohappenwitheachsuccessivegeneration.Oncethedoorofcompromiseis open, even just a little, subsequent generations push the door open wider.Ultimately,thisisamajorcontributingfactortothelossofbiblicalauthorityinourWesternworld.DonotaddtoHiswords,lestHerebukeyou,andyoubefoundaliar.(Proverbs30:6)

TheissueofcontradictionInmany instances thebelief inmillionsofyears totally contradicts the clear

teachingofScripture.Herearejustthree:1.Thorns–Fossilthornsarefoundinthefossilrecord,supposedlyhundreds

ofmillions of years old. So these supposedly existedmillions of years beforeman. However, the Bible makes it clear that thorns only came into existenceafterthecurse:ThentoAdamHesaid,“Becauseyouhave...eatenfromthetreeofwhichIcommandedyou,saying,‘Youshallnoteatofit’:Cursedisthegroundforyoursake...Boththornsandthistlesitshallbringforthforyou.”(Genesis3:17–18)2.Disease–Evidenceofdiseaseslikecancer,braintumors,andarthritiscanbe

foundinthefossilremainsofanimalssaidtobemillionsofyearold.Sothesediseasessupposedlyexistedmillionsofyearsbeforesin.TheScripture teachesus that after God finished creating everything, with man as the pinnacle of

creation, He described the creation as “very good” (Genesis 1:31, emphasisadded).Certainly,Godcallingcancerandbraintumors“verygood”doesnotfitwiththenatureofGodasdescribedinScripture.

3.Diet–Genesis1:29–30explainthatAdamandEveandalltheanimalswerevegetarian before sin entered the world. However, the fossil record includesmanyexamplesofanimalseatingotheranimals—supposedlymillionsofyearsbeforemanandthusbeforesin.

TheissueofdeathRomans 8:22 reveals that the whole creation groans because of the

consequences of theFall—the entrance of sin.Oneof the reasons it groans isbecause of death—death of living creatures, both animals and man. Death isdescribed as an “enemy” (1 Corinthians 15:26), and one day death will bethrownintothelakeoffire(Revelation20:14).Romans5:12andotherpassagesdeclarethatphysicaldeathofman(andreally,deathingeneral)enteredtheonceperfect creation because ofman’s sin.However, if one believes inmillions ofyears,thenthereweremillionsofyearsofdeath,disease,suffering,carnivorousactivity,andthornsbeforesin.Thefirstdeathwas in theGardenofEdenwhenGodkilledananimalas the

first blood sacrifice (Genesis 3:21)—a picture of what was to come in JesusChrist,theLambofGod,whowouldtakeawaythesinoftheworld.JesusChrist stepped into history and paid the penalty required by our sin—

death—bydyingontheCross.HeconquereddeathwhenHerosefromthedead.Althoughholdingtoanoldearthisnotasalvationissueperse,webelievethatwhenaChristian insistsonmillionsofyearsofdeathbeforesin it is reallyanattackontheworkofChristontheCross.“AndGodwillwipeawayeverytearfromtheireyes;thereshallbenomoredeath,norsorrow,norcrying.Thereshallbenomorepain,fortheformerthingshavepassedaway.”(Revelation21:4)Inaculturewherethefoundationofthegospelhascomeunderattackbythe

conceptofmillionsofyears,itmakessensewhythenextgenerationiswalkingawayfromthechurch.Believinginmillionsofyearsmaynotaffectthatperson’ssalvation,butitcanaffectthenextgeneration—particularlyintheirwitness.Itissimplyamatterofputtingtwoandtwotogether:ifthefoundationofthegospel(i.e.,Genesis1–11)isnottrue,thenwhywouldthegospelbetrue?Kidsinthenext generation can put and have been putting this together (see Ken Ham’sbookco-authoredwithBrittBeemercalledAlreadyGone.)

Ifpeoplebelievetheopeningchaptersof theBible, thenwhycan’t theytrusttherest?Conversely,ifpeopledonotbelievetheopeningchaptersoftheBible,whendotheythinkGodstartstotell thetruthinHisWord?We,asChristians,need to start teaching theBible—includingGenesis—as the authority in everyareaofourlives.Whenwitnessingtoacultureinfluencedbymillionsofyears,wehavefoundit

tremendouslyeffectivetoexplainthe“GenesisGround”ofthe“RomansRoad.”That is, we explain the foundation of the gospel found in Genesis beforeexplaining the gospel message of Christ’s sacrificial and atoning death, andsubsequent burial, and Resurrection. In this way we counter the evolutionaryideas that have infiltrated theminds of the next generation.We teach the badnews in Genesis, and then we proclaim the “good news” (the gospel) that isrootedandgroundedinthebadnews.Wecallthisthe“Genesis-RomansRoad”approach.

Genesis—RomansRoadGenesis1:1–Godmadeeverything.“InthebeginningGodcreatedtheheavensandtheearth.”Genesis1:31–Godmadeeverythingperfectly—nodeathorsuffering.“ThenGodsaweverythingthatHehadmade,andindeeditwasverygood.Sotheeveningandthemorningwerethesixthday.”Genesis3:17–19–Thepunishmentforsinisdeath;duetosin,theworldisnolongerperfect.“ThentoAdamHesaid,‘Becauseyouhaveheededthevoiceofyourwife,andhaveeatenfromthetreeofwhichIcommandedyou,saying,“Youshallnoteatofit”:Cursedisthegroundforyoursake;intoilyoushalleatofitallthedaysofyourlife.Boththornsandthistlesitshallbringforthforyou,andyoushalleattheherbofthefield.Inthesweatofyourfaceyoushalleatbreadtillyoureturntotheground,foroutofityouweretaken;fordustyouare,andtodustyoushallreturn.’”Romans5:12–BecauseourmutualgrandfatherAdamsinned,wenowsintoo.“Therefore,justasthroughonemansinenteredtheworld,anddeaththroughsin,andthusdeathspreadtoallmen,becauseallsinned.”

Romans3:23–Weneedtorealizeweareallsinners,includingourselves.“ForallhavesinnedandfallshortofthegloryofGod.”Romans6:23–Thepunishmentforsinisajustpunishment—death—butGodcametorescueusandgivethefreegiftofsalvationbysendingHisSon,Jesus.“Forthewagesofsinisdeath,butthegiftofGodiseternallifeinChristJesusourLord.”Romans10:9–YouneedtobelieveinJesus;salvationisnotbyworks,butbyfaith(seealsoJohn3:16andActs16:30–31).“thatifyouconfesswithyourmouththeLordJesusandbelieveinyourheartthatGodhasraisedHimfromthedead,youwillbesaved.”Romans5:1–Beingsaved,youarenowjustifiedandhavepeacewithGod.“Therefore,havingbeenjustifiedbyfaith,wehavepeacewithGodthroughourLordJesusChrist.”