How can creation week be literal 24 hour days?

[miamited]

Obviously it was not literal "days". A day is the period of revolution of a planet, and is a different length of time on each planet. The "days" of creation simply mean "periods of time", and science reveals that they were very long periods of time.

Hi paul,

You are, of course, free to believe that. However, I will agree with you that when someone says or writes 'days' they may be speaking of an era or some period of time actually longer than a single day, hence the use of the plural 'days'. But, 'days' isn't the way that God describes the creation week. He lists each day and numbers it. Further, He defines each day as encapsulating an evening and a morning. Merely further proof that He meant for us to understand them to be pretty regular spans of time on the earth that would be equal to a normal day today with an evening and a morning.

God has not left us without a valid testimony, but it's our individual choice as to whether we will accept His testimony or not. Eve and Adam didn't.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[Halbhh]

As we can see (not a surprise at all), there are so many reasonable guesses about creation.

But the one thing any believer in Christ Jesus, risen and to come again, hallelujah!, could agree on, from hearing Christ's words in the gospels, and reading the epistles, is that salvation isn't about knowledge of small details of creation. Salvation is from the amazing Grace of God through Christ, redeeming us, through our faith in Christ Jesus. I once was dead, but now I am alive in Him!

 

[marineimaging]

How do we explain the creation week as literal 24 hour days in the light of the verses below (no pun intended)?

'Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.' -- (Gen 1:4-5).

"Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. So the evening and the morning were the fourth day." -- (Gen 1:16-17).

The sun was made on day four.

So what was the source of the light on day one, if not the sun?

And if it was not the sun, then how can the fist three days be literal 24 hour days, since the sun is what determines a 24 hour day?

And if there was already light on the earth on day one, then how can the sun be made on day four "to give light on the earth", a light that already existed on day one?

And if the light and darkness were already divided on day one, then how can the sun be made on day four "to divide the light from the darkness", a division that already existed on day one?

I do believe, however, that all six days of creation week were literal 24 hour days.

But how do we give such a literal explanation to anyone who ask, since the literal evidence (the sun made on day four) does not seem to support it?

To me that is somewhat like asking, "Why did God call the first day, and the second day, and the third day and so on, why did he call them a day in the beginning when a day had not happened yet? Is it possible he knew in the great scheme of his design what he was going to make a day to be? So why should God have defined the amount of years man should live naturally and then reduce it and reduce it again when time was of no consequence to him? Why was Jesus appointed to rule the earth upon His return for 1000 years when time mean nothing? Why was it important to state that Noah entered the ark in his six hundredth year, and on the 17th day of the 2nd month of that year "the fountains of the Great Deep burst apart and the floodgates of heaven broke open" and rain fell for forty days and forty nights until the highest mountains were covered 15 cubits, and all life perished except Noah and ..., why does all of those times matter to God? My statement is that your question is sort of like asking why did God, in the first five books make time, and generations, and the spaces of time to define nature so important when He clearly states emphatically that time is of no consequence to Him? I bet that if you keep studying yourself you will discover in the translations how the light and darkness differs from the orb called the sun, and that little one called the moon. But more specific to your question, how did God know the first day that it was the first day if there was no light or darkness, no sun or moon? How did He know what a day was or was going to be? Maybe because in the offering to mankind He had a chronological order of events laid out that was better understood several thousand years ago as they were described then. But now we need an absolute sense of order or it does not exist. Personally, I used to argue those kinds of things as to why the Bible failed to convince me about Jesus. Then one day Jesus called and I answered and He filled my heart and THAT is the only day I care about any more. Millions, billions of people have found a multitude of reasons not to believe in the Word of God. If they are going to reject the Bible, if they are going to reject the Lord and eternal salvation and Love and Blessings from Him because they can't grasp the idea of the chronology as explained, they are not going to believe anyway. And if they are called by the Lord to join us, that little issue won't matter one bit. Nor will they bother with a thousand other things that they can call inconsistencies in the text. God Bless you for caring though. I fully understand where you are coming from and now, ask you to understand that He made it through all of this time, since the beginning, without us needing to understand nor needing to explain the details to a person who will turn out to be a tire kicker anyway. And if they are not a tire kicker and are truly interested in understanding God, then they will have to accept him 100% first. Otherwise He will just confound them.

 

[Ancient of Days]

"How can creation week be literal 24 hour days?"

Why is that so hard to grasp for some of you folks. Maybe you should be asking why did he take so long? He could have done it in 6 hours, 6 minutes, six seconds, in an instant...

Its six literal days. That's what GODS WORD SAYS! PERIOD, END OF STORY. You only have two choices now, you either believe what he said he did and how long he took to do it AS WRITTEN. OR YOU DONT BELEIVE HIM.

 

[ladodgers6]

How do we explain the creation week as literal 24 hour days in the light of the verses below (no pun intended)?

'Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.' -- (Gen 1:4-5).

"Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. So the evening and the morning were the fourth day." -- (Gen 1:16-17).

The sun was made on day four.

So what was the source of the light on day one, if not the sun?

And if it was not the sun, then how can the fist three days be literal 24 hour days, since the sun is what determines a 24 hour day?

And if there was already light on the earth on day one, then how can the sun be made on day four "to give light on the earth", a light that already existed on day one?

And if the light and darkness were already divided on day one, then how can the sun be made on day four "to divide the light from the darkness", a division that already existed on day one?

I do believe, however, that all six days of creation week were literal 24 hour days.

But how do we give such a literal explanation to anyone who ask, since the literal evidence (the sun made on day four) does not seem to support it?

If you really want to know, read Meredith Kline on creation week, literal 24 hours days.

Hope this helps???

 

[mark kennedy]

To me that is somewhat like asking, "Why did God call the first day, and the second day, and the third day and so on, why did he call them a day in the beginning when a day had not happened yet? Is it possible he knew in the great scheme of his design what he was going to make a day to be? So why should God have defined the amount of years man should live naturally and then reduce it and reduce it again when time was of no consequence to him? Why was Jesus appointed to rule the earth upon His return for 1000 years when time mean nothing? Why was it important to state that Noah entered the ark in his six hundredth year, and on the 17th day of the 2nd month of that year "the fountains of the Great Deep burst apart and the floodgates of heaven broke open" and rain fell for forty days and forty nights until the highest mountains were covered 15 cubits, and all life perished except Noah and ..., why does all of those times matter to God? My statement is that your question is sort of like asking why did God, in the first five books make time, and generations, and the spaces of time to define nature so important when He clearly states emphatically that time is of no consequence to Him? I bet that if you keep studying yourself you will discover in the translations how the light and darkness differs from the orb called the sun, and that little one called the moon. But more specific to your question, how did God know the first day that it was the first day if there was no light or darkness, no sun or moon? How did He know what a day was or was going to be? Maybe because in the offering to mankind He had a chronological order of events laid out that was better understood several thousand years ago as they were described then. But now we need an absolute sense of order or it does not exist. Personally, I used to argue those kinds of things as to why the Bible failed to convince me about Jesus. Then one day Jesus called and I answered and He filled my heart and THAT is the only day I care about any more. Millions, billions of people have found a multitude of reasons not to believe in the Word of God. If they are going to reject the Bible, if they are going to reject the Lord and eternal salvation and Love and Blessings from Him because they can't grasp the idea of the chronology as explained, they are not going to believe anyway. And if they are called by the Lord to join us, that little issue won't matter one bit. Nor will they bother with a thousand other things that they can call inconsistencies in the text. God Bless you for caring though. I fully understand where you are coming from and now, ask you to understand that He made it through all of this time, since the beginning, without us needing to understand nor needing to explain the details to a person who will turn out to be a tire kicker anyway. And if they are not a tire kicker and are truly interested in understanding God, then they will have to accept him 100% first. Otherwise He will just confound them.

As far as knowing day and night, God just thinned out the clouds, at the beginning of creation week and he was still working on the atmosphere day four when the sun moon and stars were mad regularly visible from the surface of the earth. It always seem absurd to think God made an entire universe with nothing but earth in it, the four days latter made the sun, moon and stars. It was all covered in water and clouds which matches the Job 38 description perfectly.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

The sun was made on day four.

So what was the source of the light on day one, if not the sun?

And if it was not the sun, then how can the fist three days be literal 24 hour days, since the sun is what determines a 24 hour day?

You are defining the sun as the source of light, not the scriptures. Obviously, there was light before there was the sun, as the sun was only created on day 4. God makes the greater lights to govern the day and night, but doesn't claim that the sun is the source of the day - it's more the ruler.

But how do we give such a literal explanation to anyone who ask, since the literal evidence (the sun made on day four) does not seem to support it?

I think it's by faith. To me, the scripture indicates that the sun governs (or rules over) the day, rather than being the day.

 

[Gottservant]

Days and nights are relative:

The longer it takes for the planet to turn, the longer the day.

So, if our planet is bombarded with asteroids, the days can be shortened.

It was not necessary for God to shorten the days, but He willed.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

believe it or not, the LORD can count..

 

[Dave L]

Everything you see in the world around you is God's eternal decree made visible by his creation of time, space and matter.

In Hebrews 11:3 the writer says; “By faith we understand that the worlds were set in order at God’s command, so that the visible has its origin in the invisible.”

Calvin translates it; “so that they became the visibles of things not visible,” or, not apparent. And then says; “thus the same truth is taught here, as in Rom. 1:20, where it is said, that the invisible things of God are made known to us by the creation of the world, they being seen in his works.”

So we are looking at eternity made visible through the matter God created to make it visible. And this can easily fit into 6 literal days. Because the distances and ages throwing a wrench into the equation was already here. Only now made visible by the creation of matter 6-7000 years ago.

The same way metal shavings when dusted on a piece of paper with a magnet below, reveal the magnetic waves. Matter reveals what was already here from eternity. Like a huge house, light-years across. Where God applies matter and all the lights come on at once. Taking moments for what would take trillions of light-years using space-time measurements.

This is just a theory not necessarily true. But it seems to reconcile science and the bible.

 

[Stringfellow_Hawke]

This is something that I have struggled with. While I haven't really had a hard time grasping the literal 6 day creation, I have a hard time discussing it with skeptics. Then there are other Believers who believe the old earth theory. I don't believe its an essential but I would really like to have a firm stance on one or the other. I've drifted from the traditional pre-trib rapture teaching of my IFB upbringing as well but that is another subject entirely.

 

[aiki]

See "Seven Days that Divide the World," By Dr. John Lennox

 

[Halbhh]

How can we better warn people to be cautious and not to add to scripture even accidentally. Not to end up (unintentionally) putting extra words into God's mouth which He did not actually say!

Not to go past the words of scripture when saying "this is what God says".

How are people adding to scripture?

Sometimes some seem to say it's God's Word (which it is not) that little or no time passed during verse 1 before verse 2 and 3, but likely others just never even noticed verse 1 isn't the same moment as verse 2 or as verse 3, and assumed little or no time without even realizing they are making an extra assumption not in the words --

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

(Verse 2 happens after verse 1. But how much time passed during verse 1 before verse 2? God did not tell us!)

The time when God created all the Universe and the Earth and all the heavenly bodies -->

The heavens -- all we can see!

Planets,
Stars,
Galaxies,
Venus,
Mars,
Jupiter,
Saturn

If a person assumes that 0 seconds or 4 hours, or some time less than a day, or whatever time, passes during verse 1 -- every such assumption or guesstimate or educated guess, every one, is outside of scripture.

It's an assumption or view about a time duration not told to us in the scripture.

Then all should humbly be sure to say, tell the truth, that it's their own view, their own personal guess or conclusion or information from outside the Bible about a time duration which compared to creation and God is really relatively very trivial -- the time duration of verse 1.

No one should claim the Bible tells us the Earth is 6,xxx or 10,xxx years old.

In contrast, we do have in scripture the descent from Adam to Christ, 42 generations, and we can figure out that time with some math (though it's important not to let that calculating become a prideful thing).

We have roughly an idea of the time from Adam to Christ, but we do not have the age of the Earth in scripture, nor deductible from scripture, except when a person mistakenly adds to scripture their own assumptions or preferences. Too many do!

Say instead, "I think the Earth is _[0, 3 seconds, 9 billion years, 2 days, etc.]__ old before verse 3 because _____"

By being clear that it's your personal view and not in scripture, then you avoid the wrong of claiming your assumptions or calculations or information is itself God's Word.

 

[miamited]

Hi halbhh,

You wrote:

It's an assumption or view about a time duration not told to us in the scripture.

But that isn't a true statement. It is a duration of time that is told to us in the Scriptures. More than once, in fact. For in six days God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. This was written some 2,000 years after the creation event and people would have known what 6 days meant. It was how God accounted for the seventh day Sabbath. Then God rested from all the work that He had done.

All of that is found in the Scriptures. No addition or subtraction or obfuscation of any kind.

Now, as to my adding some of what I believe about the creation event, here goes. I believe that there is a reason that God caused to be written in the account of the creation the phrase, 'and there was evening and there was morning...'. You see, I believe that God knows the beginning from the end. I believe that on the day that God caused to be written the account of the creation while the Israelites sojourned in the wilderness, that He knew that it was going to be an issue for man to understand and believe that He really did create this realm in six rotations of the earth that He created as the first piece of this realm.

God could have caused to be written that such and such happened and that ended the first day. Then such and such happened and thus ended the second day. If God had written it that way, I believe that He knew well in advance that man would never be settled in what the use of the word yom was actually to have meant. So God, being all wise and holding all knowledge and knowing the beginning from the end encouraged His Holy Spirit to prompt the writer of the account in the Scriptures to write that each day consisted of an evening and a morning. You see, we can take the word yom and use it in many different ways and it can mean at least a couple of different time measurements. This is what the unbelievers try to impress upon us all the time. You can't know with any certainty what span of time God meant when we read the word 'yom'. But, by adding the definer of an evening and a morning...well, that kind of does set the definition and understanding of the word 'yom'.

Go ahead, use the word yom in all the different ways that it can be used as far as a definer of a span of time. Then add in your sentence where you are meaning it to stand for an age or an era, and there was evening and morning of 'yom'. No one has ever written that there was an evening and morning of an age or era. Firstly, you wouldn't put evening first if you were speaking of the 'dawn' of an age. Friend, God is wiser than you could ever hope to imagine to be and He has given you evidence that His testimony is true. The question is whether or not we will stand with God, or rather allow the wisdom of men to cause us to stand apart from God's truth?

If it weren't that science tells us that a six day creation account is impossible, we would probably more of us believe it. But, I think for those who would say, "Well, science has proven such and such and so and so..." that they might want to take a moment and reflect on what science also teaches about a woman giving birth to a child without sperm ever being introduced into her uterus. Science is clear. A woman cannot get pregnant without sperm to fertilize her egg. There has never been any case, nor has there ever been anyone able to prove that a woman can drop an egg during her monthly cycle and that egg grow into a baby in her womb...without that egg not having been fertilized with male sperm.

So, now, if science is your rule of law, then you must agree that the account of Jesus' birth is also not possible, according to all known man-made science. That it is impossible that Mary ever laid in a manger giving birth to a child without having had sexual relations of some kind. That is impossible!!!! Just as the six day creation, according to science, is impossible!!! But for the one who studies the Scriptures, there is just as much evidence found within them that God did mean that He created this realm in six pretty regular 'day' spans of one rotation of the planet, as there is evidence that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived...FAITH!

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[Halbhh]

Hi halbhh,

You wrote:


But that isn't a true statement. It is a duration of time that is told to us in the Scriptures. More than once, in fact. For in six days God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. This was written some 2,000 years after the creation event and people would have known what 6 days meant. It was how God accounted for the seventh day Sabbath. Then God rested from all the work that He had done.

All of that is found in the Scriptures. No addition or subtraction or obfuscation of any kind.

Now, as to my adding some of what I believe about the creation event, here goes. I believe that there is a reason that God caused to be written in the account of the creation the phrase, 'and there was evening and there was morning...'. You see, I believe that God knows the beginning from the end. I believe that on the day that God caused to be written the account of the creation while the Israelites sojourned in the wilderness, that He knew that it was going to be an issue for man to understand and believe that He really did create this realm in six rotations of the earth that He created as the first piece of this realm.

God could have caused to be written that such and such happened and that ended the first day. Then such and such happened and thus ended the second day. If God had written it that way, I believe that He knew well in advance that man would never be settled in what the use of the word yom was actually to have meant. So God, being all wise and holding all knowledge and knowing the beginning from the end encouraged His Holy Spirit to prompt the writer of the account in the Scriptures to write that each day consisted of an evening and a morning. You see, we can take the word yom and use it in many different ways and it can mean at least a couple of different time measurements. This is what the unbelievers try to impress upon us all the time. You can't know with any certainty what span of time God meant when we read the word 'yom'. But, by adding the definer of an evening and a morning...well, that kind of does set the definition and understanding of the word 'yom'.

Go ahead, use the word yom in all the different ways that it can be used as far as a definer of a span of time. Then add in your sentence where you are meaning it to stand for an age or an era, and there was evening and morning of 'yom'. No one has ever written that there was an evening and morning of an age or era. Firstly, you wouldn't put evening first if you were speaking of the 'dawn' of an age. Friend, God is wiser than you could ever hope to imagine to be and He has given you evidence that His testimony is true. The question is whether or not we will stand with God, or rather allow the wisdom of men to cause us to stand apart from God's truth?

If it weren't that science tells us that a six day creation account is impossible, we would probably more of us believe it. But, I think for those who would say, "Well, science has proven such and such and so and so..." that they might want to take a moment and reflect on what science also teaches about a woman giving birth to a child without sperm ever being introduced into her uterus. Science is clear. A woman cannot get pregnant with sperm to fertilize her egg. There has never been any case, nor has there ever been anyone able to prove that a woman can drop an egg during her monthly cycle and that egg grow into a baby in her womb...without that egg not having been fertilized with male sperm.

So, now, if science is your rule of law, then you must deny that the account of Jesus' birth is also not possible. That it is impossible that Mary ever laid in a manger giving birth to a child without having had sexual relations of some kind. That is impossible!!!! Just as the six day creation, according to science, is impossible!!! But for the one who studies the Scriptures, there is just as much evidence found within them that God did mean that He created this realm in six pretty regular 'day' spans of one rotation of the planet, as there is evidence that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived...FAITH!

God bless,
In Christ, ted

Toi many words. Perhaps you want to discuss my own guesses about the (unimportant mere) fine duration during verse 1? Well, it's not the the Bible, so it's an outside of scripture discussion, which is fine if we remember that.

 

[miamited]

Hi halbhh,

You also wrote:

No one should claim the Bible tells us the Earth is 6,xxx or 10,xxx years old.

But it does! If, by understanding when God wrote that each day of the creation defined as an evening and a morning were pretty regular days like we experience today that consist of an evening and a morning (although we now account it the other way around), then Adam was created on day 6 of the existence of this created realm. If we continue reading the Scriptures we find a fairly concise list of the generations from Adam to Noah and then from Noah to Abraham and then we have the age of the patriarchs as they came to their deaths. So, any reasonably good student of math can figure out how many years passed from day 6 of the creation when Adam was formed to the years that Abraham walked about the earth. Then we can add in the years of the patriarchs which will carry us forward to the sojourning of the 12 sons in Egypt. We have a fairly reliable timeline of the days of their generations in Egypt and then we come to the 40 years in the wilderness and then the days of the judges and kings and so forth.

Now, I'm not one do make any such claim that it was exactly 5,289 days and 16 hours and 13 minutes, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of wiggle room from some number around 6,000. Even the Jewish calendar, which is claimed to date back to the beginning, accounts us as being in year 5778. Now, if all we know about God came to us through the Jewish people that He raised up to be His nation upon the earth to do His bidding, then we may want to take that numbering by the Jewish calendar as possibly being somewhat correct.

But, to say that the Scriptures do not tell us that the earth is about 6,000 years old, is not a true statement. It would only be true 'if' one were unable to establish for themselves that the six days of creation were actually six days of which each one consisted of an evening and morning.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

Toi many words. Perhaps you want to discuss my own guesses about the (unimportant mere) fine duration during verse 1? Well, it's not the the Bible, so it's an outside of scripture discussion, which is fine if we remember that.

Hi halbhh,

Look, if you're going to throw all of the accounting of time out the window just because you can't see how the introduction of the creation in vs. 1 throws all that comes after it into a tailspin, well, then I would point you to the account of the creation in Exodus. Here, God has answered your question in the way that you should be able to set aside your confusion about vs. 1 in Genesis.

For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.

I don't find that these other references to the time span of the creation event to be as ambiguous. Further, the Scriptures obviously explain that the earth was made before the sun.

God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

If we are to assume that the order is correct but that the explanation of the span of time of the 'day' is in question, then I would ask you, 'Why?' Why would God create the earth to sit and spin alone in all of the universe for however long you account the days to be, until He created the sun? If you believe that God can merely speak into existence things that are not to be things that are, then why would it take Him thousands or millions of years of time to put this realm of existence together and in place? Personally, I'm surprised that it took Him six days, but there again I can draw some possible reasons. First, it may well be a test of faith that God has set before us. Sure, it would be easier for believers to explain that the entire universe, this realm of existence in which we live, just all came about instantaneously by the command of our God. The earth the sun the stars the plants the creatures all appeared just 'poof' all in place at God's command. But, to believe that He spent 6 days creating??? That now becomes harder to believe. Now we have to explain how the earth existed before the sun and moon. How plants could have existed before the sun. Oh, now it takes a bit more faith to believe in this not only nearly instantaneous creation event (6 days), but we have to believe that the earth existed before the sun and plants existed before the sun.

I'm sorry if lots of words confuse you or cause you some consternation, but...

Paul and Peter and John wrote entire treatises on matters of faith and so I think it should be understood that faith is not often explained to unbelievers in cute little short 6 word sentences.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[gideon123]

OP ... can i ask you a simple question?

What is your real purpose in asking these questions?

 

[Halbhh]

Hi halbhh,

Look, if you're going to throw all of the accounting of time out the window just because you can't see how the introduction of the creation in vs. 1 throws all that comes after it into a tailspin, well, then I would point you to the account of the creation in Exodus. Here, God has answered your question in the way that you should be able to set aside your confusion about vs. 1 in Genesis.

For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.

I don't find that these other references to the time span of the creation event to be as ambiguous. Further, the Scriptures obviously explain that the earth was made before the sun.

God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

If we are to assume that the order is correct but that the explanation of the span of time of the 'day' is in question, then I would ask you, 'Why?' Why would God create the earth to sit and spin alone in all of the universe for however long you account the days to be, until He created the sun? If you believe that God can merely speak into existence things that are not to be things that are, then why would it take Him thousands or millions of years of time to put this realm of existence together and in place? Personally, I'm surprised that it took Him six days, but there again I can draw some possible reasons. First, it may well be a test of faith that God has set before us. Sure, it would be easier for believers to explain that the entire universe, this realm of existence in which we live, just all came about instantaneously by the command of our God. The earth the sun the stars the plants the creatures all appeared just 'poof' all in place at God's command. But, to believe that He spent 6 days creating??? That now becomes harder to believe. Now we have to explain how the earth existed before the sun and moon. How plants could have existed before the sun. Oh, now it takes a bit more faith to believe in this not only nearly instantaneous creation event (6 days), but we have to believe that the earth existed before the sun and plants existed before the sun.

I'm sorry if lots of words confuse you or cause you some consternation, but...

Paul and Peter and John wrote entire treatises on matters of faith and so I think it should be understood that faith is not often explained to unbelievers in cute little short 6 word sentences.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

Ted, it's really simple for me -- I believe all the words, just as they are, and of course (as I know you know) the age of Earth specified as "6,xxx years" does not appear anywhere. And see, I'm not willing to add it on as being scripture.

I don't trust as if scripture the ideas that aren't stated in scripture. Call me overly cautious if you like, but to me it's instead 'obedient'.

While I think that starlight appears very old (and I'm not vaguely relying on other's information for that, having personally measured the speed of light in a lab with a classic and simple rotating mirror experiment and done the measurement personally) so that the 'heavens' are simply directly observed (not even theory involved) to be old, that's not specified in the Bible, and I don't depend on it even slightly. For instance, God could have intentionally created the appearance of old starlight even, if it pleased Him to do so. I'm very fine either way. Can you hear that? I'm not basing faith on such things, not on the "old Earth" nor on the "young Earth".

Neither.

Not even slightly.

Instead, I build the foundation of my faith, and I really hope you will too, on this --

24“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.”

Build on the rock everyone, that your faith may endure.

Everything else but this is sand as a foundation for your faith.

Build on the rock, and you can make whatever trivial mistakes about things that don't matter you like, and others too, and we will love one another.

 

[Jamsie]

But, 'days' isn't the way that God describes the creation week. He lists each day and numbers it. Further, He defines each day as encapsulating an evening and a morning. Merely further proof that He meant for us to understand them to be pretty regular spans of time on the earth that would be equal to a normal day today with an evening and a morning.
God has not left us without a valid testimony, but it's our individual choice as to whether we will accept His testimony or not. Eve and Adam didn't.

Perhaps another way to view the days is quite clearly as command or Fiat days. For on each day "And God said,..." nothing more. The question too is why must the days be consecutive...there is no indication saying that they were, but only that there were six creative days.