Justin Taylor has written an article on the Gospel Coalition, Biblical Reasons to Doubt the Creation Days Were 24-Hour Periods. It is interesting; but I think ultimately very weak. For the record, I’m not committed to a young earth. I think the evidence is inconclusive (one might even say it is ambivalent). Neither am I committed to the calendar-day interpretation of Genesis 1. But I don’t think Justin’s article, at least, gives us good reasons to doubt that interpretation. I’ll work through his arguments using his headings:

1. GENESIS 1:1 DESCRIBES THE ACTUAL ACT OF CREATION OUT OF NOTHING AND IS NOT A TITLE OR A SUMMARY

Also

2. THE EARTH, DARKNESS, AND WATER ARE CREATED BEFORE “THE FIRST DAY”

These are simply irrelevant to the length of yom. I myself am more inclined to readGen 1:1 as, “When God created the heavens and the earth”—but this is perfectly consistent with taking 1:1 to describe the first thing God did. The problem is, if 1:1 is a merism and encompasses everything made, then it makes no sense for God toafterward say “let there be light” (v 3)—since light was already created in v 1, and indeed the sun was already present also.

This also makes Gen 1:14 and Gen 1:16 incomprehensible. Even assuming you translate v 14 as something like, “Let the lights in the expanse be to separate the day from the night”, rather than, “Let there be lights in the expanse to separate the day from the night”—which you will notice no translations do—you would have to translate v 16 in the pluperfect; ie, “God had made two great lights…” But it just isn’tin the pluperfect.

3. THE SEVENTH “DAY” IS NOT 24 HOURS LONG

I think Justin is right about this; which does suggest that it may be permissible to treat yom as more than a calendar day.

The problem is, in the absence of any additional reasons to stretch the previous six days of creation, it is merely an interesting sidenote; not an argument. It doesn’t actually add to the positive case he wants to make.

4. THE “DAY” OF GENESIS 2:4 CANNOT BE 24 HOURS LONG

True—but it is linguistically handicapped to argue that if a figurative expression like “in the day” doesn’t refer to a calendar day, then neither must a seemingly non-figurative, programmatic expression like “there was evening and morning, the fourth day”.

Read More