Understanding the Days of Creation with Mike Riddle

The Battlefield in Genesis and the Question of the Days of Creation

Thank you, Gary. Okay, so we are recording and we're on our way to going live. There we go. So let's get started. I am Terri Kammerzell here on behalf of Creation Fellowship Santee. We're a group of friends bound by our common agreement that the creation account as told in Genesis is a true depiction of how God created all life and the universe in just six days a few thousand years ago.

We've been meeting here on Zoom since June of 2020 and we've been blessed with a great blend of presentations that cover topics of creation apologetics, other theology topics, and even some current events.

Tonight we are happy to have our longtime friend Mike Riddle and just as a reminder you can find links to most of our past presentations by typing in tinyurl .com forward slash cfsantee that's c like creation f like fellowship santee is spelled s-a-n-t-e-e and you can also email us at creationfellowshipsantee at gmail .com so that you get on our mailing list.

We won't spam you but we will send you links to our upcoming speakers. So back to our speaker tonight it's Mike Riddle, our longtime friend. Mike Riddle is the founder and president of Creation Training Initiative.

He's an apologist and an education specialist. He is an international speaker and teacher on biblical creation, apologetics, and Christian education. He has been involved in creation apologetics for over 35 years.

Mike has spoken at NASA, many secular and Christian universities, churches around the world, state homeschool conventions, and secular and Christian schools. Prior to being involved in creation ministry Mike was a captain in the in the United States Marine Corps and a national champion in track and field.

His experience he has a great amount of experience but we're going to let let him go ahead and just share with us tonight. So go ahead.

Mike. Well thank you. The most important thing you didn't tell everybody I have six very cute grandchildren. Yeah I forgot. That's the most important thing. Anyway we're going to go to the battlefield today.

Why I call it a battlefield because this is where many attacks are coming is in the first chapters of Genesis and we cannot afford to lose that because too many of our youth are losing trust in the Bible because they lose trust in these first several chapters.

So we're going to take on the argument the Genesis and the days of creation. Can we really know for sure what they are? Does it make any difference? So that would be our topic. So as soon as we get the PowerPoint going here.

You seem to be stuck there. I see it. There we go. And we're going to start with something called the topics the sufficiency of scripture. We're going to talk about seven evidences for the days of creation.

We're going to answer four challenges and then we're going to talk about the authority and consistency of scripture and finally end up with why does all this matter. So that'll be our topic we're going to go through.

The Sufficiency and Authority of Scripture

So let's start with the sufficiency of scripture. 2nd Timothy 3 16 and 17 says this. All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching for reproof for correction for training and righteousness so that the man of God may be adequate equipped for every good work.

Well notice it there says all scripture doesn't say some of it all scripture starting with the verse in the beginning God created. All that is inspired by God. God breathed. What I want to point out these words adequate and equipped.

What they mean is this complete. We are fully equipped with God's word. It means we really don't need any outside resources which can help. I like evidence and evidence will always support God's word.

But it says God's word is sufficient for what we need. Then John 17 17 teaches this. Sanctify them in the truth. Your word is truth. In other words God's word is the only reliable truth in all the universe.

And we need to keep that in mind. He's given us everything we need in his word. It's the only truth that never changes. And we're to be sanctified or set apart by his word. So there's the sufficiency of scripture and the authority of scripture.

That's what we're going to use. So with that in mind the bible is our authority. I'm going to go into seven evidences about the days of creation. How long were they? Number one is God defined the length of the word day.

Matter of fact he specifically chose the word day. He explicitly chose the word day yom for his length of time. Now how long is that word day? Well in Genesis 1 5 he defines it. God called the light day and the darkness he called night.

And there was evening and there was morning one day. That should end all discussions right there. God specifically said a day is the light and dark portion. That's it folks. That it should be over right there.

However people don't want to believe God's word because they've been influenced by outside sources. So let's go a little further now. A number is used with the word day such as one day, second day, third day, fourth day, fifth day, sixth day.

A number used with the word day. Now I'm going to bring in a big word here called hermeneutics. That is the science or rule for how we interpret language. It is the rules how to interpret God's word. And we're going to stick to those.

We're not going to allow implications. We're not going to allow anything else. We're going to use God's word. What does it say? Context is one of the most important rules of understanding any language.

We must keep the language in the context that it's given to us. Let me give you an example of context. If I were to spell a word and you try and pronounce it the word would be b-o-w. How would you pronounce it?

Well some would say bow. Some might say bow. Well how do you know how to pronounce it when you read it? It is called context. C-b-o-w can have different meanings but context rules how we interpret the word.

And anytime and every time we see a number with the word day in the Old Testament it always means a short period of time a day. There are no exceptions to that. So God defined the word day then he put a number with it.

Right there are two powerful evidences. God said a day and he meant a day. But it even goes further. The word day is bounded by evening and morning. Evening and morning one day. Evening morning second day.

Evening morning the third day. Every time we read that every time we have the phrase evening and morning it only means a literal day. The context again always a day. Then there's another rule of hermeneutics called the explicit.

If something is explicitly stated it has a higher priority than what you might imply it means. So we say there the explicit overrules the implication that you might have there. In other words the plain reading God's word is the best reading.

So now we have God defined the word day. He put a number with the word day and he bounded it by evening morning. Each day definitely beginning and a definite ending. Again the argument should be over there but people are so convinced in their own mind that that can't be true.

In other words here we are a created being trying to tell the creator of the universe you really didn't mean that did you? And that's what's happening today. In many of our so-called Christian universities we have too many of our professors in there not believing God's word and training our next generation of pastors and students not to believe God's word.

Then the plain reading. Three times three times the bible explicitly states God created everything in six days. The bible never states it took long ages millions of years. It never does. But three times in Genesis chapter 1 six days.

Exodus 20 verse 11 God says for in six days the Lord made the heaven the earth the sea and all is in them. Then in Exodus 31 verse 17 God again tells us six days for his creation. How many times does God have to tell us something before we believe it?

The problem here again is people are influenced by the world rather than God's word. So they won't believe Genesis chapter 1. But in Exodus 20 verse 11 God is writing this down on the clay tablets the stone tablets.

And commandment number four again God writes this down. He wrote this down for in six days the Lord made the heavens the earth the sea and all is in them. See if you do not believe the days of creation were literal days in Genesis then commandment number four does not mean what it literally states.

And it's open to our own suggestions. If commandment number four doesn't mean what it literally states how can we trust the other nine? See there's a lot at stake in those first chapters of Genesis. If we don't believe the first chapter then now we've thrown away the ten commandments.

They're just nothing more than suggestions now. We can interpret it any way we please. This is the problem of not trusting God's word. Remember all scripture is God breathed and he said it is true. Are we really going to stand front face to face with our creator someday and say you didn't really mean what you said.

I know better. That's what's happening in our Christian universities and it's happening in some of our churches. But God always has a remnant. You know I get to travel all over the country and there are some wonderful bible believing pastors out there and there's still some good ones in our Christian universities that believe God's word and thank God for those people that are still teaching the truth.

Then we have the plain reading. I put this challenge out there. If you wanted the reader to understand God meant six literal days in Genesis chapter one what would you change? Probably nothing. You wouldn't need to change anything because it explicitly says six days.

It puts a number of word day. He defined the word day but evening and morning first day the second day the third day. You wouldn't need to change anything but if you wanted everybody to really understand his creation was millions and millions of years you would have to change a lot of things in there.

So the plain reading is always the best reading and there's nothing in Genesis chapter one to suggest these are not literal days. Now let's go to the New Testament. Mark 10 verse 6 evidence number six here.

Jesus Christ is making a statement here. He's talking about marriage but he also says this but from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. What did Jesus just tell us? Jesus the creator of all things just told us that man and woman were on this planet from the beginning of the creation not after millions of years.

Is Jesus wrong here? I don't think so. Then finally evidence number seven. We'll go to Genesis chapter 1 verse 14 and we'll look at the language here. Then God said let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night and let them be for signs and seasons and for days and years.

Here's the question. Notice God uses different references of time there. He uses a season, a day, and a year all in the same sentence here. Now if a day does not mean a literal day there or and day means something like long ages then how long is a season and a year?

You see the language makes no sense if a day does not mean a literal day here. So God defined the word day. He specifically chose the word day. He put a number of the word day. He put evening and morning around the word day which always means a day.

So we see overwhelmingly the days were literal days. He even stated three times that he created everything in six days. Nowhere does he ever say he took long periods of time to create. It's not a biblical concept.

Challenges to Literal Days

Now we've had seven evidences the days were literal days. Let's go now and answer some of the more common challenges against literal days. The first one we're going to do is 2 Peter 3. This is one of the most common challenges.

What's so important about 2 Peter 3? Well here's what it says. But beloved be not ignorant of this one thing that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. Now doesn't it teach right there that a day can be a thousand years maybe even longer?

Well that's what it appears to say. So we're going to answer this challenge in three steps. Let's not forget that context matters. That's very important. That's one of our main rules of interpretation context.

Then we're going to look at another rule of hermeneutics or rules for interpreting language. That's called the style of writing. And then we will draw a conclusion about 2 Peter 3. Can it be used to support the days of creation for long periods of time?

Let's start with context. When we read the verses before 2 Peter 3 and the verses after 2 Peter 3 what we find out is it's not talking about Genesis. It's not talking about the days of creation. It's actually referring to the end times in the character of God.

That God created time and He's not bound by time. That's the reference here. That's the context. It has nothing to do with the days of creation. So right there we see a lot of people are taking God's word out of context to support their personal opinions.

Now let's look at the style of writing. Well beloved be not ignorant of this one thing that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years is one day. Now the Bible is written in many different formats.

Many different styles of writing. One of the questions I like to ask people is do you take the Bible literally? If you say yes you're in trouble because the Bible literally states that God is Jesus is the rock.

So are we worshipping rocks? If we take the Bible literally we're saying Jesus is a rock. But if you say no you're also in trouble. That's an example I call a loaded question. It's a question with a hidden premise.

Do you take the Bible literally? The answer is this way. The Bible is written in many different styles. I take the Bible literally where it's meant to be taken literally. In other words the Bible is written in historical format.

It's written in poetry. We've got apocalyptic. We've got many different formats. So we need to look at 2nd Peter 3. What format is that written in? Well there's a very important word here. Word as. That word as turns 2nd Peter 3 into a simile called a figure of speech.

Now hold on now. What is a figure of speech? That's where you use words to paint a picture. For instance if I were to say it was raining like cats and dogs yesterday. Well are cats and dogs literally coming down from the clouds?

Well no. When we say it's raining like cats and dogs we're using words to paint a picture of a torrential downpour. Or if I said that gentleman over there I watched him run yesterday. He runs like a gazelle.

Now did I just call him an animal? Well no. When I say he runs like a gazelle I'm using pictures to paint a word that he runs gracefully and he runs fast. And 2nd Peter 3 is a figure of speech. What it's saying is God is not bound by time.

A thousand years is nothing to him. Why? Because God lives in all time all of the time. He doesn't go back and forth through different time zones. He lives in all time all of the time. So a thousand years is nothing to him but it is something to us because we are bound by time.

So this again has nothing to do with the days of creation. So context, talking about the end times, the attributes of God. Style of writing, it's a figure of speech. Conclusion, it is incorrect to use the language in 2nd Peter 3 to support the days of creation for long ages.

In other words we're taking God's word out of context and that's a serious issue there. So 2nd Peter 3 cannot be used to support the days of creation for literal days. Here's another common challenge coming out of Genesis chapter 2 verse 4 which reads this way.

This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven. Now here's the word day in Genesis 2 verse 4 which is still part of the creation account and it said that this word day does not mean a literal day.

It very well may not mean a literal day but people need to understand something about the language. The word day is yom y-o-m but that's not the word that is used here. Word used here is beyond which is part of a prepositional phrase which is an idiom here.

In the day is a Hebrew idiom meaning when. So when the Lord God made heaven and earth. So yes it's not necessarily talking about a literal day of creation, it could be talking about the whole creation week.

So it's we need to understand something about the language. Yom is used in Genesis chapter 1 for all six days but here the beyond is used which means when. Now what in the world is an idiom? An idiom would be like again a group of words that don't mean what they mean literally.

For instance somebody said his boss threw him under the bus. Did his boss literally throw him under a bus to be crushed? No it means the boss made him take the blame for everything. Or another idiom would be he's walking around with a chip on his shoulder.

Is somebody really walking around with a chip on their shoulder? No it means this person's walking around and they get upset very easily. So yom and beyond two different words used. So we need to make sure we're very careful how we interpret God's Word.

In the day is a Hebrew idiom for when. When the Lord God made earth and heaven. Plus notice the word day is not used with a number nor is it bounded by evening and morning. So our rules still are in place.

When the word day is used with a number it always means a day. When there's evening and morning it always means a day. We must look at the context and people are not using the basic rules of interpretation.

They're using whatever they want to. They're trying to add to God's Word, change God's Word. No God's Word is perfect. We need to stop changing it based on what we want to believe. Well how about this one?

Here's a very popular challenge. Word day can have different meanings and that is true. We don't deny that. The word day or yom can have different meanings. It can mean a literal day. It can mean a period of daylight, a season, a year, a distant point in time, or some time in general in a general sense.

So the word day can have a lot of different meanings. Again if it has different meanings how do we determine what it means? Not your opinion. I don't care about your opinion. We do not need science to understand this.

So forget about all your science. What we're using is God's Word as our authority because it told us in 2nd Timothy 3 16 and 17 His Word is sufficient. We don't need outside sources. The only outside source we might need to help us understand is the Holy Spirit, not our understanding of scientific evidence.

So let's look at some examples here. Again context matters. Let's go to Genesis chapter 4 verse 3 and it reads this way. In the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of ground to the Lord.

Where the word time is actually the word yom. Notice it's actually translated time. Is that okay? Yes it is because the context is referring to a growing season. So the word yom there is really meaning a growing season.

But notice it's not a bounded or accompanied with a number nor bounded by evening and morning. Context matters. The little word day would not be a very good translation here. And in the process of time or a growing season it came to pass.

That is the correct translation. That is the correct word for yom there, time. Context matters. Let's go to Isaiah 30 verse 8. Now go write it before them on a tablet and note it on a scroll that it may be for time to come forever and ever.

Where the word used for time there is yom again. Is that correct? Yes it is in the context because in the context there we're referring to future generations forever and ever. That's what it means there.

So we translate the word yom mean time. Also note it's not accompanied with a number nor is it bound by evening and morning. So our rules of hermeneutics are keeping straight there. Context matters. Remember the word b-o-w.

How you translate it, how you read it, determines on the context it's used. And that is the same rules for the word yom. Let's try 1st Kings 1 .1. Now King David was old, advanced in years, and they put covers on him, but he could not get warm.

Well the word years there is yomim, which is the plural of yom. Is that correct? Years. Yes it is because the context is to be old. It wouldn't make any sense if we said he's advanced in days. It makes more sense to say advanced in years.

So again context warrants the translation. So and also it's not bounded by a number nor bounded by evening and morning. So again our rules still are working there. Let's do one more. Genesis 18 .11. Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age.

Sarah was past childbearing. Well the word age there is yomim again, which is the plural of yom. Is that a translation? Well yes it is because context warrants age and not day to be past childbearing.

So we don't say you're past childbearing days. We say you're past childbearing age. So the correct translation in yomim is age. Again context. When we start working with God's Word, we must understand context.

If you can't figure it out, read above it, below it, and figure out what was going on and who's involved there. That will help you understand the context. And also it's not accompanied with a number nor is it bounded by evening and morning as it is in Genesis chapter one.

Let's go to the last challenge and this is one that's being taught in a lot of our universities. Genesis one is poetry and not meant to be taken literally. When somebody challenges me with this, the first question I have is what do you mean by Hebrew poetry?

Can you give me an example of Hebrew poetry? And most of the time they can't. So how do they know it's poetic language? Because somebody else told them is usually the answer. Well let's take a look at this.

Hebrew poetry is characterized by something we call parallelism. One of the main formats of Hebrew poetry. Parallelism. And we use that in the Old Testament. That's part of the Hebrew. And there's two forms.

There's synonymous parallelism where the words and two or more lines or phrases are directly related to each other. There's two lines say the same thing but they use different words. That's synonymous parallelism.

Two words or two lines or two phrases say the same thing but use different words in each phrase. The other is antithetical parallelism. This is where you have a statement one where they're opposites. Notice the first part of statement might say the positive but the second part gives the negative.

So they're saying the same things but one does it in a positive format. The second one does it in the negative or vice versa. Those are two very popular forms of Hebrew poetry. In English we use rhyming for poetry.

The main forms of English poetry is rhyming. That is not part of Hebrew poetry. It's parallelism. Let's take an example of each. Here's synonymous parallelism found in Psalm 19 .1. The heavens tell of the glory of God.

There's part one and here's part two. And their expanse declares the work of his hands. Both things both parts are saying the same thing but using different words. That is Hebrew poetry. That format folks is not found in Genesis 1.

It's not part of Genesis 1. Then let's look at antithetical parallelism in Proverbs 10 verse 1. A wise son glads his father. That's part one part two. But a foolish son grieves his mother. We have the positive then we have the negative.

That structure is also not found in Genesis 1. In other words Genesis chapter 1 is written in the Hebrew narrative format. It's meant to be taken as literal history not poetry. And now the last part. I'm going to bring up an eighth one now.

We had seven evidences. Now let's take an eighth evidence. The authority of scripture and the consistency of scripture. So the authority and consistency of scripture. We saw in 2nd Timothy 3 .16 all scripture is God-bred.

All of it comes from God. And then verse 17 .1 say it is sufficient. John 17 .17 says we're to be sanctified by God's word. Why? Because it is truth. Then here's another part. Exodus 24 verse 4. Moses wrote down all the words of the Lord.

Then he rose early in the morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain with 12 pillars for the 12 tribes of Israel. Notice he says Moses wrote down what? All the words of the Lord. What did Moses write?

The first five books Bible. He wrote Genesis chapter 1. And what does it say here? Those are the words of the Lord. But what about science Mike? And this is where a lot of people get hung up. Our radiometric dating methods.

What about geologic dating? What about the bossom ring? What about astronomy? This is starlight. Well folks let me remind you all scripture is God-bred and it is sufficient. It is our authority. Science is not our authority as Christians.

It should never be our authority. Now I like science. Science is very good and scientific evidence can be very helpful. But it does not supersede God's word. True science, true science will always agree with God's word.

Because who created all the scientific evidence? God did. Who created the radiometric dating methods? Man did. Let's keep that in mind now. Now here's a scientist Dr. Hugh Ross. He's an astronomer president of a group called Reasons to Believe.

Now I want you to, I want to point something out about this statement. Here's Based on scientific dating records each of God's creation days is several hundred million years long. Now wait a minute. When we read that I have a question.

What is Dr. Ross's starting point? Is it the Bible or is it science? Well based on this statement his starting point is science not God's word. In other words he has elevated his own wisdom above God's wisdom.

And that's what's happening too often in our Christian universities. Our professors and all these PhDs are elevating their wisdom over God's word. That is a serious issue. Science is not our authority.

Here's another one from a group called BioLogos. And here's their statement. So are the days of Genesis meant to be understood as regular 24-hour days? Yes and no. The frequent references to ancient cosmology in Genesis 1 indicate that God did not choose to reveal modern scientific information to the ancient Hebrews.

Now what's their starting point here? Science. In other words they believe in their own understanding of the scientific evidence is greater than the plain reading of God's word folks. That's going to be a serious issue there.

God's word is sufficient. We do not need scientific evidence to understand God's word. Science is good. I like the scientific evidence but it does not supersede the plain reading of God's word. That's the issue.

So questions. Here's a question. Have scientists ever been wrong on their dates for rocks and fossils? Absolutely they've been wrong. Many many times have been wrong. So what we're saying here is their dating methods are fallible aren't we?

They've been wrong over and over again. And there's many inconsistency. You can take a rock sample dated by three different methods and get three different ages. And one of the things we need to understand about radiometric dating, how we date rocks, they don't give an age.

None of these methods give an age. What we do is find a ratio of elements in there then we interpret an age. See that's not what's being taught in our schools though. None of these methods give an age.

We look at the ratio of elements in there then we interpret an age. And a lot of times we're very wrong on these ages. So they are fallible. Has the reported age of the earth ever changed? Absolutely.

Look over the last 50, 60, 70 years the age has changed. So that's not an absolute. In other words the age of the earth is a fallible guess. So why are fallible men willing to use fallible ideas to reinterpret God's infallible word?

That is what's happening over and over again ladies and gentlemen. It's coming from our many of our Christian universities. It's coming from many of our pastors. And they're filling our children's minds with wrong information.

They're filling our minds with young children that they do not have to believe the plain reading of Genesis 1. What does that do to them and the rest of scripture then as they grow up? It ruins their confidence in God's word right off.

And there's a history of doing this. Let me give you a history. I call this new revealed knowledge. Mormonism. Joseph Smith. New revealed knowledge. All of a sudden we have a new way to reinterpret the Bible.

Seventh-day Adventist. Ellen White. New revealed information. New way to interpret the Bible. Church of Christ. Christian scientists. Mary Baker Heady. New revealed information. New way to interpret the Bible.

Jehovah's Witness. Charles Taz Russell. New revealed information. New way to interpret the Bible. Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard. New revealed information. New way to interpret the Bible. Are we getting the hint what's happening here?

Islam. Muhammad. New revealed information. New way to interpret the Bible. Let's look at this one now. Scientific age. New scientific knowledge. New way to interpret the Bible. Do you see any difference that's happening here?

God's word is unchangeable. It should, it never changes. It's good for the past. It's good for now. And it's good for the future. God does not change. His word is truth. And it is sufficient. And it should be our authority.

Not new revealed information. So it comes down to a matter of authority here. When we change or reinterpret the plain reading of scripture with creeds, our understanding of the scientific evidence, or confessions, we place ourselves as the final authority over what is true and what is not.

I thought God's word was truth. But too many people are placing their, themselves, as the final authority over what the Bible means. Here's Richard Barkus. Makes this statement about Genesis in the Bible.

If the Bible fails in anything it teaches, even one small thing, then like a facade, our faith will crumble. And we would no longer have reason to believe that even the things that remain are trustworthy.

If the Bible fails in prophecy, history, or science, how can we continue to place our faith in the God who wrote it? What a powerful statement there. Folks, science is good again. A lot of times it's our understanding or misunderstanding that is the problem.

A matter of consistency. If we use our understanding of the scientific evidence to interpret Genesis 1, then we must be consistent with every other miracle in the Bible. How about the parting of the Red Sea?

Are we going to have to find a scientific answer? Or can we believe that God, all-powerful, almighty God, can do that? Or can we say, no, that can't be true. There has to be a scientific answer to that.

Folks, we're going to start eliminating the miracles of the Bible. How about the burning bush that was not consumed? How do you explain that scientifically? Well, we've got to have some scientific answer.

The Bible can't really mean that. That's what it means when we say Genesis can't really mean what it says. Or how about a speaking donkey? I've never seen a donkey speak. I've seen him make sounds, but I've never seen him speak English.

But the Bible clearly says a donkey spoke. Are you going to look for some scientific answer and not believe what the Bible says there? How about Jesus turning water into wine? What kind of scientific explanation are you going to use there?