Surprised by Logic

Among some believing Christians, there exists a ‘friendly’ debate that centers on the meaning of the creation account in Genesis.  The principle point of contention concerns the definition of ‘day‘ and ‘morning and evening‘.

Young earth creationists (YEC) argue that the ‘plain’ understanding of the text is to take the Hebrew term YOWM to mean a 24-hour period of time. They do, to their credit, acknowledge that the Hebrew language allows for the existence of different concepts that YOM can mean. But in Genesis, they seem to insist on the above translation.

One of their buttressing evidences for taking YOWM to mean a period of 24 hours is the addition of the phrase, “and there was evening and there was morning, the first (second, third etc) day.”

With love, but disagreeing respectfully with my Christian brothers and sisters, I want to offer the compelling reason why I do NOT accept a six 24-hour day interpretation of the creation account.

The simple reason finds its support in the fact that the Hebrew language contains far fewer words than English.  Therefore, each noun can represent multiple concepts.  One can still take the text ‘literally’, but one has to take into consideration other factors.

Caveat: I am a layman who has neither formally studied Hebrew nor biblical theology.  I am simply a thinking Jane who is puzzled at the tenacity some Christians employ in their defense of a young earth interpretation.  My hypothesis is that they strongly defend the inerrancy of God’s word as do I.  But the difference, I think (and I could be wrong) is that YECers fear that admitting to any other interpretation of the creation of our universe starts Christians sliding down the proverbial slippery slope.

How does a ‘slippery slope’ defense go?

X might not be false, but if I admit X, then Y will follow.

For that defense to be true, one must prove true the following two premises:

• X causes Y
• Y is detrimental

By the way, not all slippery slope arguments are fallacies as some claim.  If one DOES prove the likelihood or truth of the above theses, then a slippery slope argument can be safely employed.

So what is the slippery slope line of thinking that YECers adhere to?  I’ve heard it go like this:

The hypothetical major premise:  If we admit that the Hebrew term YOWM, when coupled with the ‘evening and morning’ reference, may mean other than a 24-hour period, then other Bible passages might be so stretched that God’s intended meaning is lost and Scripture is up for one’s pet translation.

I DO hold to a high view of Scripture and believe in the inerrancy and even the infallibility of the original manuscripts as given by God through the Holy Spirit to the holy men who wrote the texts.

Furthermore, I take the Hebrew definitions of YOWM literally.  One of the meanings for YOWM IS a long period of time.  In addition, one of the meanings of evening and morning IS a marker for beginning and end. Daniel 8:26 in the ESV states: The vision of the evenings and the mornings that has been told is true, but seal up the vision, for it refers to many days from now.”

When I looked up that verse in Blue Letter Bible, the Hebrew meaning of the English plural words ‘the evenings and the mornings’ was actually in the singular.  So one can render the translation of the first part of the verse like this: “The vision of the evening and the morning that has been told is true”

And taking YOWM to mean a period of time, here is the last part of the verse, “but seal up the vision for it refers to much time from now.”

But why do I THINK that the creation of the universe took a long period of time?  I’m not going to develop this theory to any depth besides to state it.  I know it deserves a book and I am not equipped nor do I choose to devote the time to that endeavor.  But here goes my line of thinking:

1. Light was created on Day 1
2. The sun was created on the 4th day
3. But…..the phrase ‘evening and morning’ describes Day 1
4. The idea of ‘evening and morning’ to mark a 24-hour day depends on the earth revolving on its axis in the presence of a fixed light source.  We don’t know the nature of the light that God created on Day 1
5. Recall that the sun, a defined illuminating star,  does not ‘show up’ in Genesis until Day 4

Therefore, the phrase ‘evening and morning’ could also refer to a concept other than the beginning and end of one 24-hour period.

That, dear friends, in a brief and simplistic nutshell, is my first reason why I am an OEC. There are others, like the impugning of God’s character to conclude that He has created geographical features with apparent age.  That sounds like a deception for the God who is by nature TRUE.

Be assured that those who disagree with me do not hurt my feelings I HOPE that I mean it when I assert that:

• I am NOT my beliefs
• My identity is secure and fixed as a ‘new creature in Christ’

And I do believe that God is capable of anything, for He is God.  So I am open to being persuaded by the evidence. In all we think, say, write and do, may God be honored by those of us who carry His name.  To Him be the glory.

PS: and do I think that some YEC fall prey to a fallacious slippery slope view?  Yes, because

•  I don’t think that the translation of YOWM I argue for (the X in the slippery slope fallacy) will lead to a Y of diluting inerrancy or ‘mythologizing’ God’s Word.

Tags: Bible interpretation, Blue Letter Bible, Creation Account, Genesis, Hebrew language, Inerrancy, Infallibility, Morning and evening, Old earth creationism, Slippery Slope, Yom, Young earth creationism