The JCSM Study Center

America's Christian Foundation

Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained

NKJV Web Hosting and Services

JCSM's Sermons, Debates and the Bible on MP3

The Online Christ-Centered Ministries

Do You Have A Web Site? Advertise On JCSM!

Seminary Notes and Papers

The Picturesque Photo Albums

The creation account in Genesis 1 should be taken literally. A normal reading of the text shows that God created everything in six, literal days. While inserting an opinion into the scriptures, that happens to coincide with some, secular scientists in the 21^st century, may seem harmless, this sort of eisegesis is the foundation of numerous, serious problems. These problems include understanding how sin brought disease, suffering and death into the world, confusing the need for forgiveness and changing God’s, ordered plan for redemption. In addition to bringing these theological problems into the Christian faith, the "long day theory" (known by unbelievers as the "evolution of species" and by theists as "theistic evolution", which has God using evolution to create life and consequently taking an extremely long amount of time for each creation day) brings unfounded, textual issues against the Hebrew manuscripts, distorts the reality of micro evolution and falsehood of macro evolution, attacks the early church fathers of Christianity and it challenges the credibility of the Word of God.

"Literal day" opposed to "long day" creation is very important to the central message of the Bible. The first sin on Earth was in the Garden of Eden. It involved Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit.

The following two scriptures help us understand the type of world that God created and what happened when Adam sinned. It is extremely important to understand these verses because they explain why the "billions of years theories" cannot be correct. Genesis 1:31 reads, "Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day." Romans 5:12 reads, "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned."

According to God’s Word, He created the world in a perfect state. He proclaimed everything was "very good". Sin entered the world through Adam and death came through this sin. Does this sequence of events make room for secular science’s interpretations of the fossil record?

According to the evolution of species, the Earth is billions of years old and the animals we see today are a byproduct of billions of years of life, "positive mutations", natural selection and a variety of other processes, including death. Incidentally, some of these processes have been observed in and under the species level. They have never been seen to produce a different kind (or something different above the species level), though.

By investigating very old, animal fossils, it has been proven that some of them had diseases and experienced suffering. If theistic evolution is true, then these diseases and this suffering occurred before sin entered the world in the Garden of Eden. This simply does not fit the sequence of events that we find in Genesis and Romans.

Why would a person insert a "billions of years scenario" into the creation account? Does the Bible need to conform to 21^st century, secular science? Do creation scientists want to be taken more seriously so badly, by their secular peers, that they distort and change the very foundation of God’s Word?

Even a rudimentary study of the Hebrew scriptures indicates another proof that God created everything in six, literal days. In each instance where the English word "day" is used in Genesis 1, the Hebrew word "yom" is used in the original manuscripts. The Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary defines "yom" as "a day, whether literally from sunrise to sunset or sunrise to sunrise, or figuratively, a space of time defined by an associated term." In the creation account, a number and the phrase "evening and morning" are used with each creation day.

Outside the creation account, the word "yom" is used with a number 410 different times. In each case, it is referring to an ordinary, literal day. How could the foundational chapter in the Bible be the exception?

Furthermore, outside the first chapter of Genesis, "yom" is written with the words "evening" or "morning" 23 times. "Evening" and "morning" appear together, but without "yom", 38 times. In every circumstance, the scriptures are referring to an ordinary, literal day.

There are Hebrew words that would indicate longer periods of time. The words "olam" or "qedem" could have been used. However, they were not. The plural form of "yom" could have been used, too. However, it was not.

If God wanted to clearly communicate that His creative powers took longer than a literal day, there are many ways He could have done this. One way is to compare the days to "grains of sand". Alternatively, He could have compared them to the "stars in the sky". There are many comparisons that could have been mentioned if God wanted readers to believe that He took billions of years to create life.

While humans are not perfect, it is still important to note that the early, church fathers interpreted Genesis chapter one in a literal manner. Martin Luther wrote, "When Moses writes that God created Heaven and Earth and whatever is in them in six days, then let this period continue to have been six days . . . if you cannot understand how this could be done in six days, then grant the Holy Spirit the honor of being more learned than you are (Plass, "What Martin Luther Says", p.1523)." John Calvin stated, "Albeit the duration of the world, now declining to its ultimate end, has not yet attained six thousand years, God’s work was completed not in a moment, but in six days (McNeil, "Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion", pg. 160-161)." Charles Spurgeon understood that, "The work of creation (took) . . . six, normal, consecutive days . . . and all (was) very good ("Spurgeon’s Catechism: Answer 9")."

Unfortunately, modern, secular science has given us long-age dates because they interpret evidence differently than creation scientists. Their miscalculations generally revolve around omitting Noah’s Flood and the cataclysmic events that surrounded it. Instead, evolutionists project that there were numerous, local floods and gradual changes in the Earth’s climate and geography. One can quickly understand how the subtraction of an intense, worldwide flood, volcanic and seismic activity, the removal of a protective water canopy, a subsequent (yet, relatively brief) ice age and numerous other changes could significantly alter the dates that evolutionists propose.

An explanation of the young earth would be incomplete without explaining micro and macro evolution. All scientists (creation and otherwise) know that evolution has happened. This is simply because God has allowed it to happen in and under the species level. This is considered micro evolution.

Macro evolution is the evolution of species (above the species level) and it is the kind of evolution that we have not observed. Consequently, conjecture puts macro evolution outside the range of the true sciences because the scientific method requires observation. At any rate, naive science teachers and deceptive evolutionists use the "bait and switch" regarding micro and macro evolution. They claim that since we have witnessed micro evolution, then macro evolution must have happened. This is untrue, biased and purely conjecture.

Creation scientists such as Ken Ham and Kent Hovind will be quick to admit that the only thing we can tell about a fossilized animal (regarding it’s offspring) is that it died. We do not know whether it had any offspring. We surely do not know if it had any offspring that was significantly different than itself; which is a requirement for the evolution of species. In short, we have never seen an ape produce a non-ape, a dog produce a non-dog, an amphibian produce a non-amphibian, etc. Since these are the simple facts, why are evolutionists not only saying these things could happen, but saying that they did happen? The simple answer is this: the only other alternative is special creation; and for them, this is out of the question.

In light of all this, are theistic evolution and progressive creation acceptable theories? Are they soundly based on the Word of God? Do they promote a scriptural sequence of events?

God’s important order is as follows: 1) He Created everything in a perfect manner, 2) Adam sinned, 3) Sin, suffering and death entered the world, 4) God gave us His plan for redemption. If we insert sin, suffering and death before the first sin, as long-age, fossil dating and theistic evolution does, then God didn’t create everything in a perfect manner and it surely wasn’t "very good". Furthermore, Romans 5:12 would have to be incorrect.

Without undermining the scriptures and without trying to conform to this world, a young earth and a literal, day creation are the only option. Not only do the Hebrew scriptures testify to a literal day, God’s foundational plan requires it. Lastly, I propose this question to theistic evolutionists: If you had no secular, scientific sources and you read the first chapter of Genesis, how would you interpret it?

Exodus 20:11 reads, "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."