“[They examined] the Scriptures daily to see if these things
were so.”—Acts 17:11
It is popularly declared and believed by many that the “obvious”
intention of the writer of Genesis is that readers interpret the creation days
of chapter 1 as normal 24-hour-days. A great
deal of weight rests on that very word “obvious” however. Clarity of thought demands that we
distinguish between the words “obvious” and “first-impression.” In order to determine the legitimacy of the
word “obvious” in that context it is necessary to determine what constitutes
actual evidence to support that word.
A few years ago I was racing up the trail at sunset against
the increasing darkening of the sky in my hike at Arches National Park. My goal was to see Landscape Arch. Fearing it was getting just too late I began
running in search of at least a brief glimpse of that geological wonder. When I finally glanced to my left side,
however, I noticed that it had already been in view for a few minutes. But it was only when I looked at it directly,
and the angle became right and the final rays of light appeared through the
arch from behind it, that I was actually able to see it. And what a sight it was!
When it comes to the first chapter of Genesis, Martin Luther
(himself a specifically 24-hour
creationist) conceded that its actual language is “difficult to understand” (Jaroslav
Pelikan, ed. Luther’s Works: Genesis. v.1. (Concordia, 1958), p.3). Although I take a different position from
Luther on this matter, I am prepared to concede that the “evening…morning”
refrain which follows nearly every creation day gives a first impression of normal ordinary days. Yet in the spirit of Luther’s reformation, namely
that faith is founded on the actual Word of God, honesty demands that we very
carefully revisit the text in question.
Every single person, myself included, comes to the Book of Genesis with
assumptions of all kinds. I do not write
this to find fault. This is a natural aspect
of our humanity that simply highlights the need for caution so that we avoid
mistaking our own “baggage” for what is actually in the text of Genesis. For this reason, it is fitting that we all go
to the text of Genesis with a spirit of eager anticipation in order to find out
what is actually there. The biblical
standard, after all, namely the default
position, is not our assumptions about the text, but the actual text of the
Bible. I must express my frustration at
English translations of this chapter that routinely ignore a number of
indications that the text of Genesis 1 is not as it seems at first. It is important that we greet the text of
Genesis head-on.
I argue that the actual text of Genesis does not support the
24-hour creation day position. You may
not agree with my opinion at this time.
But I have undertaken a very serious study on this matter. I wish to highlight the “indications” I
mention above that typically escape casual notice. To this end I urge you to read my paper, “The Biblical Demand to Reconsider the Days
of Genesis 1: Ten ‘Compelling’ Exegetical Reasons the ‘Days’ of Creation Are
Non-24-Hour.” You may find it at my
website at www.christianityontheoffense.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment