Why I believe in a literal six days of creation: Part 2

So, I said in my last post that I would lay out the positive case for a literal six days of creation.  The goal of this post will be to at least partially fulfill this promise.  The reasons for believing a literal six days of creation are complex and require a thorough biblical theology to explain.  Therefore, in order to establish the reasons for believing in a literal six days of creation I will attempt to look at the text, and then look at how the rest of Scripture deals with this text and the ideas in the text, and then demonstrate that the strongest argument for reading this text is to understand that Scripture is arguing for God literally making the earth in six days.  This is not to say that there are no other ways to read the text of Genesis 1, and I will attempt to address the other ways of reading the text some throughout the section, but I do intend to argue that a literal understanding of the six days of creation is the best way to read the text.

Let us look at the text then:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” And God made the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so. And God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. And God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.

And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” And God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so. And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. (Genesis 1 ESV)

This is the full text of Genesis 1.  Obviously the argument rests on the question of whether "day" in each of these verses is a literal day, or if it could be metaphorical.  Basically the argument for the metaphorical interpretation says that "day" in this instance could very well mean "period of time" or something similar.  This is based upon the fact that the Hebrew "yom" (y-oh-m) can mean both a literal day and a period of time.

That the author of Genesis uses "yom" in a metaphorical way is quite easily demonstrated just by looking to chapter 2 where we read, "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens."  The author clearly intends "day" to refer to everything that happened prior, so that where we previously see "day" used 7 times (by the beginning of chapter 2 we have the seventh day) here all 7 of those days are included in one reference.  The author of Genesis clearly uses day to indicate metaphorical days, and thus could have intended "yom" in the first chapter to be metaphorical.

However, in the case of Genesis one we see strong evidence that "day" is not meant to be metaphorical.  What we see is the word "yom" used with the phrases interpreted "evening and morning" and each "day" is numbered.  In every other  happens in Scripture, so that a day is linked to an evening or a morning, or a day is numbered, it always means a literal day.  For instance, there are no metaphorical instances of the words "evening" or "morning" in any other passage in Genesis, and in each other passage where you read of a "first," "second," "third," etc., day, it always refers to a literal day.  Thus, if the author intended to use the term metaphorically he did not indicate it in the text by the words he chose.

Some argue that the metaphorical nature of the text is obvious because the sun and moon do not exist until day 4, therefore the days cannot be literal because you cannot have an evening or a morning without a sunrise and a sunset.  However, this argument misses the point that the only thing necessary for an evening and a morning is a fixed point on the earth where light is focused that there is darkness and light in succession.  Thus the sun is not necessary so long as light is being provided by some other source, which is what the creation account indicates in Genesis.  Yes, today we need a sunrise and a sunset for evening and morning because the sun is the source of light for our earth, but when creation was occurring we see the statement that God was the source of light, in that God spoke and light existed independently of the sun.

To back up the claim that God operates as an the independent source of light we can turn to Revelation where we see the profession that there will be no sun and no moon, for God himself will be the source of light.  (Rev 21:23; 22:5)  Even if one were to argue that Revelation is intending this in a metaphorical sense, the argument for God as light is made throughout Scripture.  Thus the argument from Scripture is that God serves as the light of creation in a very real sense.  In Genesis the most logical understanding of the text is that God was acting as the source of light for creation establishing his presence prior to the creation of the sun and the moon.

So, we have the use of the term "day" in conjunction with the words "evening" and "morning" along with specifically numbered days.  All of these terms in Genesis 1:1-2:3 indicate literal days in the text.  To argue that there is contextual evidence to indicate a metaphorical use of "day" in Genesis 1 is to beg the question.  First you have to assume the metaphorical interpretation and then you can find the evidence from reading the text.  However, if you do not assume the proposition of a metaphorical interpretation in Genesis 1, you cannot find evidence to support a metaphorical interpretation.  The same is not true for the literal interpretation whose evidence exists even assuming a metaphorical interpretation and then looking for evidence to the contrary.

Along with the terms we already looked at there is a second point, going back to Genesis 2:4.  Genesis 2:4 reads "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth."  This sentence is important because we see it repeated throughout Genesis.  In Genesis 5 we read of the generations of Adam.  In total this term is repeated 11 times in Genesis.  In every one of those instances the author lays out an actual genealogical list to go with the words and in each section he gives real details of events that happened implying that these lists are to be taken literally.  Thus this term links the story of creation to the rest of the history given in Genesis.  While some people think the lists of genealogies are mythological, the text does not treat the histories in this way.  Thus the textual evidence is that the creation story is to be understood along side the history of Genesis, and that the history is to be understood in a literal sense, which means the creation story should be understood just as literally.

But, we do not only have to rely only on Genesis to help us understand whether the days of creation were literal.  We can also look to Exodus.  In Exodus 20:11 we see Moses tell the Israelites that they were to keep the Sabbath because the Lord created the heavens and the earth in six days and then rested on the seventh.  Thus the law of the Sabbath in the Old Testament is based on a literal understanding of the days of creation.  Arguing for a metaphorical seven days would undermine the reasoning behind the Sabbath because one could say, "God didn't really create the earth in six days and rest of the seventh, that's just a metaphor."

The reason this evidence should be compelling is because the traditional understanding of the authorship of Genesis is that Moses wrote it just as he wrote Exodus.  Since Moses is recognized as the author of both of these books his understanding of the days of creation as revealed in his statement on the Sabbath should carry significant weight.  Moses relied on the literal interpretation of creation to give understanding to the requirement of rest on the Sabbath, therefore we should pay attention to his reasoning.

This understanding of creation not only plays out in Moses and the Law, but in all the rest of Scripture.  As I indicated in my discussion of the first day of creation, God created the universe in a way that imbued history with meaning.  If we read the creation story as a literal story imbued with meaning we see why the seven days of creation are so important.

I already discussed day one, but I'd like to zoom out and discuss the whole creation narrative.  Many people have noted that the form of Genesis 1 is a kind of poem.  There is a repetition and agreement within the creation narrative that speaks to balance.  What you have is days one to three, then days four to six.  Each of the first three days corresponds in some way to the last three days.  On the first day you have light and dark, on the fourth you have the sun and moon.  On the second day you have the seas and the heavens as well as the dry land and earth, and on the fifth day you have the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, who multiply to fill the earth.  On the third day you have vegetation on the earth and fields and grass, and on the sixth day you have the ground animals and man, who will eat and tend to the vegetation.  Thus the first three days are mirrored in the last three days, demonstrating a poetic ordering of the universe.

The concept of an ordered universe as revelatory of God is furthered in the New Testament when we read, "God is not a God of disorder but peace" and further "But all things should be done decently and in order." (1 Cor 14:33, 40 ESV.  I chose a different interpretation of the word "confusion" going with "disorder" in 1 Cor 14:33 as the Greek root is the same and the conceptualization of "not disorder" but "order" is better seen with this interpretation.)  This idea of God setting up an ordered universe is important as it underlies the argument of Romans 1, wherein we read that the attributes of God have been clearly revealed in creation.  The idea of God creating the universe in a way that displays his glorious attributes, including order and a beauty (as seen in the poetic balancing of creation) is thus supported throughout the rest of Scripture.

So, let us close the theological net here and lay out a reason for the seven days of creation as we see them.  Assuming the points above, that God seeks to reveal himself through his works, and assuming a standard Christian theology that Christ is the one God desires to glorify (for the Father desires to glorify the Son as the object of his love, and the Son gives that glory to the Father as the object of his worship and adoration) then we can draw forth a picture from creation that speaks to the beauty of God, the need for order in the universe, and results in the glory of God.

Here we go:  God created the world as way of exalting Christ, displaying poetic beauty, and establishing the law of love.  The first day speaks to the Son, as he is the Word of God and is the light of the world and the life of men.  From the first day we then see how the first week speaks to the beauty of God, as creation becomes a kind of poem with the days becoming mirrors of one another.  At the same time by specifically bringing about the various parts of creation on different days God shows his care for each part of creation and how important each aspect is to him.  Finally on the seventh day, God rests from the work of creation, thus establishing a pattern that man was to follow.  This shows the mercy of God in giving man rest by basing the pattern of rest on creation itself.  Thus those who refuse to give rest to their workers, or the rulers who do not allow their citizens to rest, or even the masters who do not allow their slaves to rest, are violating the rules of creation and not acting in love toward their fellow man.

The seven days of creation thus end up pointing to Christ a second time in the law of rest.  For man was created to work the world before it was fallen.  In a fallen world the work of man is all the harder and is now toilsome instead of purely joyful.  Man cannot rest for he is under the constant condemnation of God, to rest would be to give way to hopelessness as man would have to admit that he cannot escape his condition.  However, in Christ man finds his rest.  In Christ man is no longer striving and working for his salvation, and even the work a man does in his regular life becomes more enjoyable as he understands it as an act of worship for Christ and not merely toilsome labor for bread that perishes.  Christ becomes the bookends of creation, being the first part of creation, and the goal of all of creation.

To Christ be the glory, as the one who began creation, as the one who sustains creation, and as the one all of creation points us back to.  To argue for a non-literal reading of the days of Genesis seems to me to rob Christ of some of this glory.  To say that God did not create the earth in six literal days, despite all the text says, and to say that the literal beauty of matching poetic stanzas in the act of creation is only a literary creation, robs Christ of his glory.  To say that there were not seven literal days where Christ was both the beginning and the end of the story, to say it was all just a literary creation to point to Christ weakens the force of the text.  Rather, let us say that Christ was the beginning of creation, the Word as life, shining light in all creation, and Christ is the end of creation--the object of our faith, so that we can enter into the sabbath rest of our God.  Let us trust in him and see that Christ has imbued all of creation with his beauty so that history itself finds its meaning in him.