Fire On Your Head

I hardly ever post on the topic of creationism vs. evolution, but there is tremendous and widespread misinformation about the meaning of the “days” of creation in the first chapter of Genesis.

Why does this matter at all? Because, as I’ve said regarding healing, tongues, prophesying, etc.., the Bible means what it says, no matter what popular theology teaches, and if we undermine the Bible in the beginning chapters, then the rest of the Bible falls apart.

Also, the following is NOT going to be a deep and intense study on the subject, although I strongly suggest reading material online such as Answers in Genesis, Institute for Creation Research or other reputable Christian ministries that deal with this subject.

Several years ago, my friend Kevin and I were appalled at something we saw on The 700 Club. After airing a report on a Christian college that was having its credentials revoked for teaching six literal days of creation, instead of evolutionary ideas and old-earth theology, Pat Robertson proceeds to make fun of these guys, and says to his co-anchor “I wish they’d get off this six literal days garbage” and proceeds to erroneously defend why we don’t really know what is meant by “days” in Genesis. I wrote The 700 Club an e-mail, as did Kevin, and we both received the same computer-generated response from Robertson’s office that basically didn’t answer any of our concerns. I still have it and will forward it to anyone that it interests.

Well, we all know that popular leaders are not infallible and are capable of being wrong in some things. And here’s why old earth vs. young earth matters at all; it undermines or upholds Scripture. Now maybe Robertson isn’t the most credible Christian figure anymore in some peoples’ eyes, but that’s a moot point, because untold millions watch this show of his daily.

Why would the word “day(s)” in Genesis not mean exactly what it says—days? There is no reason for it other than Christians have gotten intimidated by what the unbelieving world says is true about the age of the earth, so we have compromised the Word of God to match what popular science says. But simple Bible exegesis–nay, READING– and leaving things alone to mean what they say is all it takes to diffuse this old-earth theory.

How come nobody argues that “because a day with the Lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day” to mean that Jesus was in the grave for 3000 years instead of three literal days in the Greek? Why is Genesis the only time people try questioning the meaning of the word “day” and not any other instance of Scripture where the word is used? By the way, when people use those verses (2 Peter 3:8, Psalm 90:4) they should keep in mind it says “a thousand years is as a day” and not millions of years.

Anyway, the Hebrew word is “yom” and EVERY TIME in the Old Testament that it is used, it means exactly that—a day. Not an “age”, “epoch” or “a period of time”. Even if it can be like a figurative period—whenever it is used not to mean a literal day (specifically the light day light hours of the day) it is used adverbially. This is obviously not how it’s being used in Genesis.

Let’s pretend the old-earth view is correct, then let’s be consistent with it and use the word “age” or epoch or “millions of years” in other instances the word ‘yom’ occurs. The best example I can think of demonstrating my point is found in the Ten Commandments:

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. (Exodus 20:8-11)

Moses uses the word here consistently to mean a ‘day’. Both when talking about the six days of working and the seventh day of rest, AND in reference to the six days of creation and the seventh of rest. I don’t think it was in the author of this text’s mind that the two were different things, or else he either

1. would have clarified he was talking about different spans of time or
2. would have used some kind of different word to indicate he was talking about two different things.

But he didn’t do either. It’s the same word in the Hebrew here, as it is in Genesis 1.

This is a brief scratching the surface of this topic! There’s so much more to cover that can be. I just don’t have the time. A good thorough book that I don’t believe has anything else out there to match it, would be Refuting Compromise, by Jonathan Sarfati. A warning though, it is highly academic and reads like an exegesis textbook. I personally only read the first 3 or 4 chapters since I bought it. But for those of you it would interest, trust me, it’s a necessity for any Christian’s library.

Don’t be mistaken. The topic of creationism vs. evolution is not a side-issue or a doctrinal one, but a foundational one. If we don’t trust the Bible to mean exactly what it says beginning in the first few verses, then this necessarily challenges the idea that the whole book is infallible. Many, many, many of the cultural wars going on in our society boil down to this issue—our origins. In the war on gay marriage, we as a Church can’t tell the world what God meant for marriage if the first book of the Bible it is mentioned in is suspect and doesn’t literally mean what it says. In the war on abortion, we can’t tell the world it’s a sin to kill the unborn if we can’t use our foundational book seriously to show and say what God intended for His creation, and so forth. I urge people reading these comments and looking at those articles to pray about having a zeal just as strong for restoring in whatever way God would have the opportunity to fight secular humanism and compromise of the Word of God in this area of Christianity. I don’t think I hammer unnecessarily about this.

Believers, and skeptics reading this: Why in so many areas do we change our theology to match circumstance or whatever the world says is so, instead of just believing the Word of God for what it says? Why not just believe it and let it mean what it says?