1
Abstract
This paper examines the Analogical Days view of the days of Genesis 1 as understood by
some evangelicals, contrasting it with the traditional 24-hour day, young-Earth perspective. The
Analogical Days view in comparison to young-Earth creationism is one that insists that the text
is presenting the days sequentially and agrees with its emphasis on the Sabbath. Whereas young-
Earth creationism is founded upon God’s word and his creation of everything came to be within
6 literal days. This analysis explores the origins, implications, and interpretations of the Genesis
days from both the Analogical Days and young-Earth creationism. The findings highlight
significant differences in interpretation, theological implications, and views on the compatibility
of scripture with scientific understanding, concluding with reflections on the importance of these
discussions for faith and understanding of the Bible.
Overview of Analogical Days Creationism
The analogical-day theory maintains that the days in Genesis51 are God’s workdays,
which are analogous to the workdays of human beings, as indicated in Exodus 20:8–11.1 For the
Scripture states,” Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all
your work,but the5seventh day is a Sabbath to the5LORD5your God. On it you shall not do any
work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your
livestock, or the5sojourner who is within your gates. For5in six days the5LORD5made heaven and
earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the5LORD5blessed
the Sabbath day and made it holy” (Holy Bible, New Living Translation, Exodus 20:8-11).
The analogical-day theory says that the days of Genesis 1 are God’s work days. They are
cycles of work and rest, analogous to the cycles of human work and rest in the daily cycle of
1 Vern S. Poythress, Christian Interpretations of Genesis 1 Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Seminary Press ;
P & R Publishing, 2013.
2
human life. That analogy is the basis for the Sabbath observance set forth in Exodus 20:8–11.
Within the six days of Genesis 1, the focus on labor and rest is the point. Accordingly, we do not
know how long the days were if we import some modern measuring apparatus, such as a watch.
The reference to evenings and mornings makes sense, because evening is the commencement of
rest and morning is the beginning of new work (Ps. 104:23).2 For the Scripture states,The theory
claims that this analogy between God’s work and human work does not imply identity “ Then
people go off to their work, Where they labor until evening.” (Holy Bible, New Living
Translation, Psalms 104:23).
In the length of the days, God’s workdays are analogous to human workdays, but they
need not be exactly the same length as the human days, when measured by modern technical
means.3 Another way C. John Collins who says the days are 24 hours but then also believes some
days are not 24 hours and that some elements of the gap theory are right.4
Collins uses his methodology to good effect in dealing with what biblical critics call
conflicting creation accounts – one in Genesis 1:1 – 2:3, another in the rest of Genesis 2. He
shows that the latter periscope, which records the creation of Adam and later of Eve and their
stationing in the garden, is not a separate creation story but simply an elaboration or “close-up”
of Genesis 1:27. He also explains the differences in the name of God in these two sections, with
the first periscope speaking of “God” (Elohim) and the following ones (Genesis 2, 3) using the
composite name, “the LORD God” (Yahweh Elohim).5
2 Vern S. Poythress, Christian Interpretations of Genesis 1 Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Seminary Press ;
P & R Publishing, 2013.
3 Ibid.
4 Jud Davis, “Why I Believe in 24-Hour Days,” Answers in Genesis, Last modified June 8, 2017,
https://answersingenesis.org/days-of-creation/why-i-believe-in-24-hour-days/.
5 C. John Collins, Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary Phillipsburg, NJ: P &
R Pub, 2006.
3
Response to Analogical Days View
Young-earth creationists believe that the creation days of5Genesis 15were six literal (24-
hour) days, which occurred 6,000–12,000 years ago. They believe that about 2,300–3,300 years
before Christ, the surface of the earth was radically rearranged by Noah’s Flood. All land
animals and birds not in Noah’s Ark (along with many sea creatures) perished, many of which
were subsequently buried in the Flood sediments. Therefore, creationists believe that the global,
catastrophic Flood was responsible for5most5(but not all) of the rock layers and fossils (i.e., some
rock layers and possibly some fossils were deposited before the Flood, while other layers and
fossils were produced in postdiluvian localized catastrophic sedimentation events or processes).6
Time measurement has a complexity to which we seldom pay attention in ordinary life.
We can talk meaningfully about the length of a segment in time only by reference to some
standard with which the segment can be compared. For example, if we say that we spent fifty
minutes eating dinner, the minute serves as our standard. In principle, we have a choice between
several possible standards, such as a second, a minute, an hour, a day, a month, a year, or a
century. Most of the time we do not worry about the standard itself, because we live in a world
with chronological regularities, maintained by the providence of God in his faithfulness.7
To be useful, standards for time must involve recurring events in the world. We measure
the time length of some new event by counting rhythmic recurrences of some other phenomenon
that we consider regular. For example, the sun completes a circuit in the sky once a day. On this
basis, we can choose the day as our standard. An event lasts four days if its span encompasses
four circuits of the sun. More precisely, the standard for a day would be a solar day, since the
6 Terry Mortenson, “Young-Earth Creationist View Summarized and Defended,” Answers in Genesis, Last
modified April 24, 2024, https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/young-earth/young-earth-creationist-view-
summarized-and-defended/.
7 Vern S. Poythress, “TIME IN GENESIS 1,” journal-article, WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL, vol. 79, 2017.
4
word day can also designate the period of daylight within a solar day (e.g., Gen. 7:12). Once we
understand what we mean by day, we can talk meaningfully about how many days old Isaac was
when Abraham circumcised him (eight days, Gen. 21:4). Or, for longer periods of time, we may
use years as our standard for measurement. For example, we may say that “Abram was seventy-
five years old when he departed from Haran” (Gen. 12:4). This statement has a clear meaning
because the word year already has a meaning, and this meaning is tied in with the rhythm of the
seasons and the yearly cycle of the sun and the stars.8
Exodus 20:8–11 resists all attempts to add millions of years anywhere in or before
Genesis 1 because Exodus 20:11 says that God created everything in six days. The day age view
is ruled out because the plural form of the Hebrew word for day (yôm) is used in both parts of
the commandment. The days of the Jewish work-week are the same as the days of Creation
Week. God could have used several other words or phrases here or in Genesis 1, if He meant to
say “work six days because I created in six long, indefinite periods.” But He didn’t. These verses
also rule out the gap theory or any attempt to add millions of years before Genesis 1:1 because
God says He created the heavens, the earth, the sea, and all that is in them during the six days
described in Genesis 1. He made nothing before those six days. It should also be noted that the
fourth commandment is one of only a few of the Ten Commandments that contains a reason for
the commandment. If God created over millions of years, He could have not given a reason for
Sabbath keeping or He could have given a theological or redemptive reason as He did
elsewhere.9
8 Ibid.
9 Terry Mortenson, “Young-Earth Creationist View Summarized and Defended,” Answers in Genesis, Last
modified April 24, 2024, https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/young-earth/young-earth-creationist-view-
summarized-and-defended/.
5
Conclusion
The discussion between the Analogical Days view and young-Earth views of Genesis 1
reflects deeper questions about the nature of biblical authority, the interpretation of ancient texts,
and the relationship between faith and science. Another interesting fact is that in both analogical
days and YEC, the subject of giants is recorded. According to Genesis 6:4, giants were on earth
before and after the Flood—whenever the sons of God (bene ha 'Elohim) sired children with
women. The "sons of God" are viewed as heavenly or divine beings in the Old Testament.
Though there are similarities between the 2 accounts, the Bible records the true history of
our world through Genesis and it can be said that Analogical days is based on biblical ideas
obscured by scientific tales. This debate encourages Christians to engage deeply with both the
biblical text and the world around them, seeking to understand how ancient truths speak to
contemporary questions. As believers navigate these complex issues, the ultimate goal remains to
glorify God through a faithful reading of His Word and a thoughtful engagement with His
creation.
6
Bibliography
Collins, C. John. Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary. Phillipsburg,
NJ: P & R Pub, 2006.
Davis, Jud. “Why I Believe in 24-Hour Days.” Answers in Genesis. Last modified June 8, 2017.
https://answersingenesis.org/days-of-creation/why-i-believe-in-24-hour-days/.
Mortenson, Terry. “Young-Earth Creationist View Summarized and Defended.” Answers in
Genesis. Last modified April 24, 2024. https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/young-
earth/young-earth-creationist-view-summarized-and-defended/.
Poythress, Vern S. Christian Interpretations of Genesis 1. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster
Seminary Press ; P & R Publishing, 2013.
Poythress, Vern S. “TIME IN GENESIS 1.” Journal-article. WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL
JOURNAL. Vol. 79, 2017.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
