2
This paper is designed to explore the analogical view of Genesis 1, and the timeline of
creation as proposed by Young Earth Creationists. This theory can be rather controversial in
theological circles as there is a lot of discussion about how things were translated and the
passage of time. In this paper we will examine viewpoints proposed by Dr. Terry Mortenson and
Michael Morrison primarily with a few other authors also included. We will conclude that it is
likely that the passage of time is more analogy than fact, especially considering the anecdotal
nature of the Old Testament and Genesis 1 in particular.
The opening passages of the Bible describe the process of creation in what is believed to
be a chronological sequence. This analogical view sees Genesis 1 as a history and almost
certainly depicts without question that the passage of time from the beginning was in the same
24-hour, day-night cycle that we see still use today. One of the most passionate arguments
presented by Dr. Mortenson states that if we look towards a slightly more evolutionary timeline
than God would be foolish. After all, why would he leave the world as a big ball of water for
millions of years before creating land? Why would he create plants millions of years before he
created the sun?
The viewpoint that we are examining here states unequivocally that creation occurred in
the order laid out in Genesis and over the span of six, twenty-four-hour days. It also denies any
concept of an ancient Earth or universe. This particular viewpoint sees Genesis as a literal,
chronological history, and takes a lot of evidence from the genealogies between Adam and
Abraham. It is clear that authors who subscribe to this view are very passionate about their
beliefs, and some seem to believe it would be insulting to God to have any differing beliefs. Dr.
Mortenson states in his paper titled ‘Young-Earth Creationist View Summarized And Defended’
3
that “If God created over those millions of years, then He clearly was not intelligent enough and
powerful enough to create a world right in the first place. Either He lacked the sovereign power
to control His creation so that it did not destroy most of His previous work or He intentionally
created obstacles to hinder Himself from accomplishing His intention of making a very good
world. And then all along the way He kept making creatures very similar to the creatures that He
had just destroyed by intention or by incompetence and impotence. What a monstrous God this
would be!” He proposes later in the same paper that the concept of the world being created and
shaped over millions of years must be a lie or grand myth.
There are however some issues with the analogical view point, one of the main ones
being the passage of time and the day night cycle. The sun, moon, and stars were not created
until the fourth day. So, there were really no ‘days’ prior to the fourth act of creation. Instead, I
propose that the acts of creation were given in a simplified time line in order to be
comprehendible to the people of the time. Dr. Mortenson points out that the original readers of
the book of Genesis were not scholars, scientists, or historians. The readers were instead former
slaves who had little to no education, this book had to be written in a way that they could
understand. While humanity can never hope to comprehend the power of God, we can barely
comprehend the passage of time. These former slaves have no concept of science, no time
keeping devices other than the sun. They could easily understand a work day based around the
rising and setting of the sun as that is what they have lived.
Science tells us that creatures came into being in the sea long before they appeared on
land, which would coincide with Genesis where sea creatures appear on day five and land
creatures appear on day six. So, the sciences and religion do not always disagree, I think they can
4
be used to expand on one another, especially in places that they do tend to line up. The evidence
that science gives us does tend to agree with the order of creation, but disputes the time line.
When we take into account who the authors and early readers of the Bible are it does seem
probable that Genesis was written in a way that even the simplest people of the time could
comprehend and appreciate, former slaves in ancient Egypt would have no concept of millennia.
Just as we today have no concept of what really lies out there beyond our solar system.
Science can agree with more than just the fifth and sixth days of creation, it also would
agree with many of the large historical events of the Bible. Many of the large cities mentioned in
the Bible have been located or have been constants in global history, such as the many, many
times that Jerusalem have been attacked, besieged, captured, or destroyed. Science has also
displayed evidence of large-scale flood events that could be the biblical flood, there has not been
any scientific discoveries that outright disprove the Bible or it’s stories. Instead, they often tend
to work well together, much to the frustration of both the theologists and scientists that seek to
prove the other wrong.
In conclusion, the Hebrew word ‘yom’ has multiple uses and possible translations, while
it is more commonly seen as ‘day’ there is also the matter of the lack of true time keeping options
prior to the fourth day depicted in Genesis 1. This and the other evidence mentioned above lead
me to believe that the passage of time is more of an analogy than fact. It was likely written in this
fashion in order to be more easily understood by the congregation and people of that time period.
Once a translation is widely accepted, it is highly unlikely to change other than to be more
simplified maybe, as the goal is to have the Bible be accessible to the masses and that must
include the lowest common denominators of society. Unfortunately, this does not leave much
5
room for conversation and potential different interpretations of the text, leading to this becoming
a controversial approach.
Works Cited
“In The Beginning, Part 2.” Faith Seeking Understanding. Accessed August 31, 2023.
https://faith-seeking-understanding.org/tag/analogical-days-view/.
Mortenson, Terry. “Young-Earth Creationism.” Science and Faith. Last modified
February 16, 2011. Accessed August 31, 2023. https://www.scienceandfaith.org/young-
earth-creationism.
Mortenson, Dr. Terry. “Six Literal Days.” Answers in Genesis. Answers In Genesis,
February 8, 2017. Last modified February 8, 2017. Accessed August 31, 2023.
https://answersingenesis.org/days-of-creation/six-literal-days/.
Taylor, Justin. “Biblical Reasons to Doubt the Creation Days Were 24-Hour Periods.”
The Gospel Coalition. Last modified January 28, 2015. Accessed August 31, 2023.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/biblical-reasons-to-doubt-the-
creation-days-were-24-hour-periods/.
“Genesis 1: Are the Six Days of Creation Literal or Figurative?” Grace Communion
International. Last modified August 2, 2018. Accessed August 31, 2023.
https://www.gci.org/articles/genesis-1-are-the-six-days-of-creation-literal-or-figurative/.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
