A Day is a day is A Day-Why of Course: Unless that day challenges Darwinism!
Thursday, August 14th, 2008Genesis has been a battleground for some time, and today is no different. This is particularly true of Genesis 1-3, which is the account of the creation and the fall. When I first began studying the Scripture, I recognized the importance of the first eleven chapters of Genesis but in retrospect I did not fully appreciate the magnitude of their significance. As I studied other areas of the Scripture and began learning the breadth and depth of God’s revelation, I saw that without the truthfulness and perspicuity of the first eleven chapters of Genesis, every major theme of Scripture lay in jeopardy.
Probably the most hotly debated issue, at least among those who would claim any God honoring respect for the Scripture, is whether or not the days of Genesis 1 are lunar days or indefinite periods of time. In other words, did God create the world in 6 days or is the simple language of Genesis concealing a deeper esoteric meaning only fully revealed to scientists quite apart from the Scripture. Scientists like Hugh Ross accept the theory of evolution and seek to interpret Genesis through the prism of evolution. In doing so, they seem to undermine what is otherwise the clear teaching of Scripture.
The place to start is always the Scripture rather than psychology, sociology, evolution, etc. We should evaluate the teachings of man in light of the clear teachings of Scripture rather than seeking to harmonize the Scripture with modern theories about man, God and His world. I am not at all against learning from science, and/or other disciplines, but to interpret Scripture in light of them rather than through consistent and sound hermeneutics is to subjugate the Scripture to the whims of man.
Consequently, this article looks at the strengths of interpreting the word “day” in Genesis chapter 1 as a normal lunar day and answers objections to this normal reading of the text.