The Debate Over The Days of Creation

Rev. Todd S. Bordow 

  1. Creation ex nihilo (out of nothing) is clear throughout Scripture
    1. Col 1:16
    2. Heb 11:3
  2. Against theistic evolution of man
    1. Gen 2:7 lifeless body until God breathed animation into him
    2. Gen 2:22 woman directly from man, not from pre-existent life forms
  3. History of the debate on the nature of the six days
    1. Early church
      1. Days are allegorical
        1. Epistle of Barnabas (2nd century)
        2. Clement of Alexandria (150-215)
        3. Augustine - instantaneous creation, 6 days a literary device
      2. Days are 24-hour
        1. School of Antioch
        2. Basil (329-379)
        3. Ambrose (4th century)
        4. Chrysostom (347-407)
    2. Middle ages
      1. Maimonides (Jewish Theologian 1135-1204) Allegorical days but instantaneous creation
      2. Thomas Aquinas (1225 -1274) Literal 24-hour
    3. Reformation
      1. Luther and Calvin - Literal 24-hours
      2. Belgic Confession - No commitment on days. "We believe that the Father created heaven and earth and all other creatures from nothing, when it seemed good to him, by his Word" (Article 12)
      3. WCF "In the space of six days" (Most of the Westminster men were literal 24-hour, a couple were Augustinian, though many did not believe the first three days were 24-hour days but longer periods like 36 hours)
    4. Modern era
      1. Dispensational movement - most literal 24-hour
      2. Gap theory — Thomas Chalmers (1804), G.W. Pember (1876), Scofield Reference Bible - many ages between Gen 1:1&1:2
      3. Day Age theory: Each day equals long period of time — B.B. Warfield, Charles Hodge (Princeton Theological Seminary — 19th century), E.J. Young, (Westminster Seminary)
      4. Framework Interpretation - N. H. Ridderbos (Dutch Reformed scholar), Meredith Kline (Westminster Seminary)
      5. Analogical days — Jack Collins (Covenant Seminary)
  4. Arguments for a literal 24-hour view (summarized)
    1. The plain meaning - day means day, morning and evening equal a day
    2. The six day work-week of man patterned after God's six days of working — Ex 20
    3. The dangerous slide into evolution and liberalism if a 24-hour view is not maintained
    4. A danger in a hermeneutic that can lead to a denial of historical truth
    5. The WCF says "in the space of six days"
  5. My arguments against a literal 24-hour view
    1. The literary pattern of recapitulation in ch. 1
      1. Days 1 & 4 have the same purpose, both separate light and darkness. Did God do this twice? In Day 4 the luminaries are not given to maintain the previously created light, but were created to give light and to separate the light from the darkness. Thus the divine purposes on Days 1 & 4 are identical. If God declared Day 1 "good," why did He discard the first arrangement and replace it on Day 4? It seems we have what is known as Hebrew recapitulation, which is a return to the same time but adding more information (see below for examples in Gen 2).
      2. The second three days match the first three days in a literary pattern.

        Realms Rulers
        Day 1 Light and Darkness Sun and Moon Day 4
        Day 2 Sea and Sky Fish and Birds Day 5
        Day 3 Plants and Land Animals and Man Day 6
        Day 7 — God Ruler over all

        Thus the days of Gen 1 are arranged in a thematic pattern. This is a prominent Greek and Hebrew method of writing history, and does not compromise the historicity of the events described (compare Matt 4:1-11 with Luke 4:1-12)
    2. The use of ordinary providence in the creation week — Gen 2:4-6
      1. Two problems — 2:5
        1. No rain to grow vegetation
        2. No man to cultivate the vegetation to secure its growth
      2. Two solutions — 2:6&7
        1. God sent a rain cloud. Though Bibles translate this word either as "mist" or "stream," the only other time it is used in Scripture denotes normal rain from the clouds (Job 36:27&28). Thus v. 6, So a rain-cloud began to rise from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.
        2. God created man to cultivate the garden
      3. Thus between each creative act of Gen 1, it seemed God used ordinary providence, i.e., rain, normal growth of vegetation, to maintain His creation even before man appeared.
      4. As the proponent of 24 hour days argue that morning and evening are to be understood in their plain sense, so the opponent can argue that the rain and vegetation growth of Gen 2:5&6 should be understood in its plain sense of normal rain and growth, as in the rest of Scripture. Thus both sides need to decide which is to be taken in its plain, literal sense: The days of Gen 1 or the providence of Gen 2:5&6.
    3. The use of recapitulation in chapter 2
      1. Gen 2 returns to the creation week of Gen 1 and adds new info
      2. God places man in the garden twice — 2:8&15 - Hebrew recapitulation
    4. Answering the Sabbath objection
      1. The language of God's working and resting is anthropomorphic On the seventh day He ceased from labor and refreshed himself (Ex 31:17). The word for "refreshed" is only used in the OT for rejuvenating oneself after hard labor. Surely we don't want to argue that the fourth commandment loses its cogency if we do not take God's resting literally. Though there is an analogy, there is not exact identity. Moses is quoting the language of Gen 1 in Ex 20, not answering all the interpretative questions on the nature of the six days.
      2. The seventh day is an eternal day (Heb 4:4ff). The evening-morning pattern is not used for the seventh day because the Bible teaches us the seventh day is never-ending. The non-literalist is suggesting that this is also how the other days are to be interpreted, that is; non-literally.
      3. Thus again there is an analogy between God's rest pattern and ours, but not an exact identity. By the Spirit's guidance Moses has set up a pattern that reflects most explicitly the theology of the Sabbath. As the earthly tabernacle was constructed after the heavenly pattern (Heb 8:5), so man's worship and work (earthly pattern) are replicated after the heavenly pattern of God's creation days. As man's earthly, 24-hour seventh day (Lord's Day) replicated God's heavenly, eternal day, so man's earthly six days of work reflected God's six-day pattern of creation.
    5. A natural reading of Gen 2 suggests that Adam's creation, his identifying and naming each kind of animal, and his deep sleep and the creation of Eve, occurred over a much longer period than 24 hours. In Gen 2:23 Adam exclaims "Now this is bone of my bone…" This seems to suggest that Adam waited a long time for Eve, not finding a helpmate after naming each kind of animal.
    6. If we are to take the word "day" in its plain sense, what about the evening and mornings of the first three days? Are there evenings without the sun going down? Not in our understanding. Thus the literal 24-hour holder must admit that we cannot understand the evenings and mornings of the first three days in their plain, literal sense.
    7. Different uses of the word "day" in the creation account
      1. 1:5a — 12 hour period of light
      2. 1:5b — 24 hour day
      3. 2:2 — eternal day of God's rest
      4. 2:4 — the whole week of creation
    8. Answering the slippery slope argument — Slippery slope arguments are normally fallacious. Does Calvinism necessarily lead into a denial for the need for missionaries? Does a high view of the Lord's Supper necessarily lead into Roman Catholicism? One must demonstrate how the non 24-hour teaching itself promotes evolution or liberalism. Often it is suggested that if we do not take the days of Gen 1 literally then nothing is to prevent us from not taking Adam literally. But the Bible prevents us from taking Adam non-literally. The answer is that Scripture interprets Scripture.
  6. Conclusion
    1. The Scripture is silent as to the age of the earth
    2. There is nothing inherent in the Genesis account that excludes animal death before the fall. The death from the curse concerns man's death (Gen 3:19, Rom 5:12)
    3. Biblical Christians can disagree based on the Scriptural evidence as to the age of the earth or the nature of the days of Gen 1
    4. Scripture is the final authority on all matters, and special revelation (the Bible) interprets general revelation (creation).

The meaning of "day" in Gen 1 has been debated in the church at least since the days of Augustine. The literary form of the passage in its relation to other scriptures is important for its interpretation. Responsible Reformed theologians have differed as to whether Gen 1 teaches a young earth or allows for an old earth. While one of these interpretations must be mistaken, we believe that either position can be held by faithful Reformed people.
(J. Gresham Machen "The Christian View of Man," pg. 115)