Old Earth? or Young Earth?

Four hundred years ago, the Renaissance was revving into high gear. Along came Copernicus and Galileo, both devout Roman Catholics. They challenged the church’s long-standing interpretation of verses like Psalms 93:1, 96:10, and 104:5. The church taught that verses like these meant that Earth was “fixed” on its axis and was located at the center of the universe.

These two men of science came to the conclusion that the Earth revolved around the Sun by observing the phases of Venus and that Jupiter was orbited by four moons.

Neither Copernicus nor Galileo ever set out to question the Bible or the church. They were just trying to learn more about the world God had made. Galileo urged theologians repeatedly to reconsider their interpretation of these verses in the Psalms in light of a deeper, more sophisticated understanding of the record of nature. But it took over two hundred years for that to happen. From the church’s perspective, the very authority of Scripture was at stake. And clerics held on to a particular interpretation of the Bible instead of reexamining the text and trying to reconcile it with data from God’s other revelation, God’s world.

Fast forward to the present day. No one debates whether Galileo was right. So was the Bible in error? No. But the church’s interpretation of the Bible was.

Did you know there is another controversy about science and Scripture in our own day? It concerns the age of the Earth and the length of the creation “days” in Genesis 1. There is a common conception that Genesis 1 teaches the creation “days” were 24-hours long and the Earth was created only about six thousand years ago. In fact, some Christians believe this so firmly that they insist all other interpretations compromise the authority of Scripture.

This interpretation causes many scientists to consider the Bible to be pure mythology because scientific evidence points to a universe that is billions of years old. This problem has led some Christians to try to find a way to reconcile God’s Word with His world. Is this approach legitimate? Is the Bible wrong? Or is science?

A key issue in the debate about the age of the Earth concerns the length of the creation days. The Hebrew word for “day” (yom) used in Genesis 1 and 2 has four literal translations:
1 A portion of the daylight period (usually a few hours)
2 A 12-hour period (generally from sunrise to sunset)
3 A 24-hour period (such as from sunset to sunset)
4 An unspecified long period of time (such as the “Day of the Lord” used throughout the books of the prophets)

So the critical question is, Which of these literal meanings seems the best option for interpreting the length of the creation “days” described in Genesis 1? In order to answer that question we will need to carefully consider what the Bible has to say and pay attention to some of the details that we might normally miss.

First, let’s look at one hypothesis about the length of the days in Genesis 1: they were 24-hour long. Some Christians say that the phrase, “And there was evening, and there was morning – the first day,…the second day,” and so on means that the “days” must be 24-hour days. That’s one possibility. However, before jumping to any conclusions, let’s take a few moments to put this interpretation to the test. How does it stand up against further observations from the biblical text?

Investigation #1 – Use of the word “day” right within Genesis 1 and 2.
Read Genesis 2:4b in the KJV, NASB, or NRSV. Here the word “day” is definitely used for an unspecified period of time. The New International Version translates the word yom as “when”. That decision on the part of the translators may cause us to miss the fact that here the Hebrew word “day” is used to summarize the activities of the entire creation week. Right here, within the context of the creation account itself, we see the word yom being used to refer to an unspecified period of time that obviously took longer than 24 hours.

Investigation #2 – Words “evening” and “morning”
Most of the creation “days” close with this phrase: “And there was evening, and there was morning – the first day,…the second day,” and so on. This phrase is a rather unusual construction. Although the words “evening” and “morning” appear near each other in other places in the Old Testament, Genesis 1 is the only place where this exact expression is used. This should be a signal to slow down and make sure we understand what the author is trying to tell us.
Not every day of creation ends with the “evening” and “morning” refrain. The seventh day does not. Many commentators have suggested that the lack of the “evening” and “morning” phrase to close out the seventh day of creation is a possible indicator that these were not 24-hour days. And according the Hebrews 4:3, God is still resting from His creation miracles. That would mean we may still be living in the seventh “day” of creation. But before arriving at any firm conclusions, let’s gather more data.
If the author was trying to describe a 24-hour period, you’d expect the text to say “morning to morning” or “evening to evening” (such as the Jewish reckoning of a “day”). By putting this construction “evening and morning” the author could be drawing the reader’s attention to the nighttime, when a worker would normally rest from labor. This is why many Old Testament scholars think the sundown-to-sunrise formula is intended to act as a symbolic unit to mark the end of one creation stage before the dawn of the next, as opposed to functioning as an indication of the duration of the creation “days”.
Let’s put the above information in our data file as we turn to a third line of testing.

Investigation #3 – Events of Creation Day 6
Genesis 1:27 describes the creation of the first humans as the closing act of the sixth creative day. Toward the end of the sixth day, after all the animals were fashioned, “God created man in His own image; He created them male and female.” This statement implies that Eve was created before the end of Day 6.
Beginning in Genesis 2:5 the author provides more details about the events of Day 6. This may help us discern what amount of time passed between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve. According to Genesis 2:8-9, after God created Adam He “planted” a garden (2:8) and “He made all kinds of trees to grow out of the ground” (2:9). Nothing in the text would lead us to think that God instantly brought the finished garden of Eden into existence. It seems reasonable to assume these activities came about through ordinary means facilitated by the God-given laws of nature, and this took longer than 24 hours.
Genesis 2 also supplies a more detailed explanation of the events surrounding the creation of the first man and woman, who are only briefly mentioned in Genesis 1:26-28. Verse 2:15 says Adam had to work to take care of the garden. 2:19-20 tells of the naming of all the animals, and 2:21 then tells of the creation of Eve. How long do you think it might take for all these events to transpire? Do the events support the idea that Day 6 lasted longer than 24 hours?

Investigation #4 – “at last”
The latter half of Genesis 2 focuses on Adam’s search for a suitable helper. As we say, a number of steps were involved in this search. When the right creature finally arrived on the scene, Adam expressed his joy in poetry. The NRSV or ESV translation of Genesis 2:23 states: “AT LAST, bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh – she shall be called “woman” for she was taken out of man.” The root of the Hebrew verb translated “at last” (hapa’am) means the “sole of the foot.” The word connotes the beating of the foot to keep time usually referring to time passing as a succession of events.
Pa’am stresses the fact that a passage of time had gone by, including the amount required for Adam to work the garden and name the animals. Yet he found no companion. But, at last, it happened.

Investigation #5 – “generations”
Let’s return for a moment to a verse we glossed over at the beginning of this study. Genesis 2:4 says, “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created”. This use of the word “generations" is the first of ten in the book of Genesis. The author uses “generations” as an organizational feature to introduce each new section of Genesis (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 37:2).
Although this repetition is a literary device, it’s worth considering the fact that the other “generations” in Genesis are obviously longer than seven days. The very word “generations” implies a lengthy passage of time with many stages and phases, much like a family tree.

Investigation #6 – Psalm 90
Psalm 90 presents yet another piece of evidence for our investigation. Moses is stated to be the author of Psalm 90 – he is also thought to be the author of Genesis. The Psalm compares God’s eternal nature with the creation of the universe. The Psalm compares a “day” to being like a thousand years. This says that Moses was at least familiar with the idea of using the word “day” to refer to a long period of time. However, we must not be too literal with the expression, “For a thousand years in your sight are like a day.” The author’s main point is not to define a specific length of time. Rather, he is comparing God’s eternality with the limited span of human life.

The end of this investigation leads us to a critical question: How can we choose which reading is correct? That’s where information from God’s other revelation comes in. What evidence for the age of the universe has God left behind in the record of nature?

No single piece of data taken in isolation is enough to close the case file on the length of the creation “days” in Genesis 1. However, with the addition of each piece of evidence, the case for interpreting “days” as long periods of time becomes more compelling.

[Back to Home]