Was Creation Done in Six Days?

There are huge debates that flare up in Christendom about Creation.  IF you believe that the Bible is the Word of God, it is very clear in what it says:  God created and populated our planet with life, ending with the crown of creation, Adam and Eve, in six literal days.  The very first words of the Bible, Genesis 1:1 says:
 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Then He says, at the end of the First day,
 So the evening and the morning were the first day.
 It uses the word ‘day,’ or 24-hours literally.  Then He repeats this exact phrase after each day of Creation: ….evening …morning …second day, and so on.  This repetition of 24-hour parameters supports the literal meaning of the word ‘day’ being 24-hour periods. In Exodus 20:11, at the time the Ten Commandments were given, it says this:  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.
 It plainly says “six days.” It’s also true that the Sabbath day is, of course, one 24-hour period, in a week of 24-hour periods. Exodus 31:17 says the same thing, except it says that “on the 7^th day He (God) rested.”  Does it make sense to stretch the word ‘day’ to millions of years there?  Does it take millions of years for God to get up enough strength to continue on? There’s a rule in hermeneutics that says, use the literal meaning if at all possible. Given God’s omnipotence, it’s certainly possible He created all this in 6 days.  He could have created the earth to look old. Or, the Flood (since it reached mountaintops in depth) unleashed in rapid fashion a gigantic compression of weight, and a layer-upon-layer of mud in a disaster that could explain what has been found—but we haven’t seriously considered that idea; the experts smugly ignore those “wacko Christian scientists”--because their explanations are Biblical, not scientific, in origin. (Look up Institute for Creation Research, at ICR.org, or visit the narratives on the walls around Noah’s Ark in Kentucky for some real facts.  It's scientific, too). But given the “findings” of science, and their theories on evolution, we’re supposed to expand the word “day” in Genesis 1 to mean millions of years to allow their “science” to be assimilated into Scripture. So, modern  commentaries of Scripture often cave, and say ‘Yes, the word “day” in Genesis 1 likely means millions of years.’ So here we have a translation of a simple Bible word, “day,” redefined simply because science says so.  Actually, it seems that pastors and theologians are intimidated by science.  Some are even mind-pansied enough to accept evolution.
 Dr. John MacArthur has some wise words on this.  As before, I will Cliff Notes them, changing several phrases so as to offer explanation--but I have changed nothing of his ideas.  Read with enjoyment: 

No one gets past the first verse of the Bible without facing the test of submission to Scripture.  Is the ‘day’ actually a day?  It isn’t unclear--it is crystal clear that it is a day.  But that’s hard to swallow.  So you never get past the first verse of Genesis without declaring on whether you submit to Scripture being God’s Word.  You either accept it or reject it--but you don’t have the right to alter it by changing the meaning beyond what is clearly before you.  There are times when the literal meaning is not the meaning—such as hyperboles, anthropomorphisms, prophecies, poetry, idioms—but God wouldn’t start the Bible out in fuzzy words, and none of the examples I just gave are implied in Genesis.  So you must fall back on a literal day.
Flat out, there is no evolution in Genesis 1, 2, or 3—or anywhere else in the Bible. Our God is a God of truth, and of unbelievable power and knowledge.  In all the debates on inerrancy of original Scripture being passed down accurately or with multiple errors, the archeology over the centuries hasn’t dented one thing of any real importance being in error—and no scholar has suggested that translations of Genesis 1-3 have been altered any over the millennia.  So, we’re faced with those words being the words God wanted to tell us. Do we believe that God created ex nihilo, out of nothing?  But evolution says something came out of nothing.  That requires more faith than belief in God.  Those that would argue that ‘God used evolution’ have no Scripture to stand on—only ‘science,’ so called.  Which would you choose?  The current word of science?  Or the Word from God?
 Keep one important thing in mind as you consider:  “Creation science” is an oxymoron (note: meaning, words that have opposite meanings, and can’t go together).  Science is a study of natural law; Creation is supernatural.  No scientific method has the tools to study Creation. Scientists are supposed to rely on observable repetition. But the only one who knows how Creation happened is the One Who was there—God.  So a critical proof of science—‘observation’—has nothing to say. So when people say, ‘Don’t we have to apply science to the Genesis account?’  The fact is, you can’t apply science to a miracle.  So, you Christians out there, you don’t have to apply scientific methodology to explain Creation.  You can’t.  Because all science is based on observation, and verification by repetition.  But Creation has no observers, can’t be verified and isn’t repeated.  It cannot be described by any predictables that science are used to.
 So you can believe God, Who always tells the truth, or you can believe Charles Darwin.  He’s pretty convincing, apparently, because 99% of the universities are Darwinian in their "science" department.  Of the National Science Academy members who were self-described atheists, 100% of them believed in evolution.  It is our belief that they backed into atheism from how they interpreted biology to suit their own needs.
 You should know that moving from Biblical Creation to Darwin is apostasy—a defection from the Christian faith. And a bad eternal ending for its professants. Take a look at other people who move away from the Bible to teach other ‘acceptable’ doctrines--like Karl Marx (founder of socialism and communism), and John Dewey (founder of secular humanism).  Though Darwin was later than these other two men who did everything they could to shred Christianity, his theories were, like theirs, a way to explain the universe without God.  Apostate scientists looking for pseudo reasons to reject Christianity and God finally found an acceptable theory in Darwin. It’s what they want. If God can be separated from origins, then we could be separated from God; and if we could be separated from God, then we don’t have to worry about sin, and guilt, and judgement—and we’re free to do whatever we want.  So evolution is not a logical door that you enter and accept it; no, you back into it amorally (or immorally) because you want to get rid of God, and do whatever sin you want.
That is the baggage you’re accepting with Darwin.  Here’s some more baggage:  He believed in eugenics and even genocide (Editor’s note: see my blog on Margaret Sanger). Historians say he was a sadist and took great enjoyment in torturing and killing animals as a child.  He loved to kill birds by pounding on their heads with a hammer. Grown up, he carried on one voyage several guns, and hoped that he might be able to ‘kill cannibals’ (his quote--of course, maybe he could tell by the shape of his target's head--science of the day--if one person had eaten someone).  As a child, he would beat puppies. Reliable historians wrote that he, as an adult, suffered from depression, agoraphobia (fear of crowds), insomnia, vision alterations, hallucinations, malaise, vertigo, shaking tachycardia, fainting spells, shortness of breath, trembling, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, muscle twitches, spasms, tremors, cramps, bloatings, headaches, nervous exhaustion, skin blisters, tinnitus, sensations of loss of consciousness, and fear of impending death!  So said his doctors. I suspect he had more than a little guilt.  For assaulting God!  Now if you want to pick Darwin for your hermeneutical genius to interpret Genesis, you just need to know that. And yet, his book has redefined the worldview. But those who believe in it are using faith—because no one has an explanation for the Very Beginning.
 But as I proved before, you can apply it here too:  Creation had no observable beginning; so choosing it is totally by faith. Why not believe the revelation of the Creator? He is the only one who was there. All that’s left for you is, are you going to believe Scripture, or are you not?  But don’t come and layer Charles Darwin in God’s Holy Word. “Well,” somebody says, “couldn’t God have used evolution?” That’s an irrelevant question; that’s an irritating question.  He didn’t, because He told you what He did. He said He made everything in six days.  If you really believe in the attributes of God, are you going to argue with Him?  

Turn to Job 38; Job and his friends are searching for an explanation of why God has made him sick and poor when he has served God all his life.  Here is part of God’s response to him:
 “Who is this who darkens counsel By words without knowledge?
³ Now prepare yourself like a man;I will question you, and you shall answer Me.⁴ “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?Tell Me, if you have understanding.⁵ Who determined its measurements? Surely you know!
 God goes on like this for 4 chapters. This is His sovereignty--his mind is not our mind.  We can't begin to understand some things. This is a beatdown; poor Job— this is the count of 10, it is over.  Finally he says (Job 42),
 I have uttered what I did not understand,Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know.But now my eye sees You.⁶ Therefore I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes.”
 This is what the evolutionists in this country need to do. Who do we think we are, rejecting God’s Word of what He has created?
 Yes, God is sarcastic and seemingly unfeeling in Job.  But there are at least three truths we learn.  (1) God is omnipotent and His motivation is past understanding; (2) He does bless Job abundantly later in his life; and (3) Job, because of sin, is not beyond suffering in the world, as we all do.  This is supposed to motivate us to seek heaven beyond this troubled life. My point here is, questioning God is a serious situation to be in—because it shows a lack of faith in Him.  Consider Hebrews 11:3:
 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible. Evolution proposes that what you see was made from something else that you see.  But God’s Word says that what you see was made out of nothing.
 Some people say, “We have to accommodate science,” so they came up with Intelligent Design (ID) as a “safe” middle ground of moderation. Truth is, that way the “Christian” scientists who encourage this “cop out” so they don't have to name God to their peers. They avoid embarrassment. They don’t have the faith that God will honor them someday for standing up for Him. And without faith, we cannot please Him, as Hebrews 11:6 says. Their refusal to name God as Creator is essentially a rejection of God. They are naming an impersonal force of intelligent design--but that’s not God; He is not impersonal.  They are denying His attributes.  For the ID people, here is a word:  "lukewarm." Consider the moderation exercised by the “lukewarm” “believers” in Revelation 3:15-16:

 “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. ¹⁶ So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. 

What is the effect of Jesus vomiting them out of His Body?  Being out of His Body means your place for eternity is the only other location—Hell. Same place as the evolutionists, who are really trying to escape God, unless they repent. They want to avoid accountability, morality, and God’s judgment. Effectively, the ID people have the same witness as the evolutionists.  Please go all the way with Christ. A president of an international Christian denomination was sent a question on his organization’s beliefs on Creation.  His response:

 The organization takes no stand on creation, avoiding such secondary issues; our efforts are designed to bring people together, based on the historically essential doctrines of orthodoxy. Creation falls into the category of non-essentials like spiritual gifts, eternal security, and the rapture.
 Amazing response…secondary issue?  So it doesn’t matter how life started (or how it ends, for these guys). These are not ‘secondary;’ they are primary.  Clearly by the ‘list of avoidables,’ this leader hates controversy. Here’s a simple test if you want to know who to donate to:  You want to know about whether a ministry truly stands up for the Bible?  Just call the head of the ministry and ask:  “Do you believe in a 6-day Creation as revealed in Genesis?”  If they say, “no,” then they don’t believe Scripture there, and they may also have other areas they feel like backing away from (or will in the future).  Our answer to Genesis 1 and 2 also reveals our attitude toward Scripture everywhere else.  But this amounts to judging God on what we like and what we don’t like in His Word.  (Ed. Note:  I have another blog on this idea). If we allow the culture to win over Christians on Genesis, then the culture can win over the Bible anywhere else. A few years ago there was a report done by the Christian Coalition who had polled 105 “Christian” colleges on the subject of Creation, among others. Only 5 believed in the literal Genesis account! In God’s plan of events, Creation is a primary issue in the Gospel.  I Corinthians 15:22 tie them together:

 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 

Adam and Christ—the first and the last—the created and the Creator--are also explained in Paul’s Gospel teachings in Romans as well as other New Testament Scriptures.  These comparisons of Adam and Christ are important salvation opposites.  Consider belief in Christ a "restart" button--since you are born again (John 3), and a new creation (II Corinthians 5:17), you get to start over, repenting from the old ties to the world, and live a righteous life.
 What is the purpose of Creation—for us?  It glorifies God for His creation power.  The comparison of Adam and Christ points to God’s redemptive purpose; God is gathering a bride for His Son. God determined Redemption before the world began.  Then He performed Creation.  While we’re on earth, we know we are accountable to God.  We have forgiveness for our sins.  We are the Church, to display His grace and mercy, His compassion and kindness.  A redeemed humanity will glorify God and Jesus Christ forever.