Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Is it really necessary for AiG to be so adamant about the six days?
. . . but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembles at my word. (Isaiah 66:2)
I must admit it: I continue to stand amazed at the number of conservative Christians and ministries that agree with AiG that we have to believe in a literal Adam and Eve, a literal bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ, and a literal Virgin Birth—but they vehemently part ways with us when it comes to our stand on the six literal days of Creation.1 Many Christians also insinuate that AiG is unloving, divisive, intolerant and not respectful of fellow Christians because we insist on taking God’s Word as written concerning the six days of Creation.
Is it really necessary for AiG to be so adamant about the six days? Does it matter? Can’t we allow some latitude here? First, the word day appears over 2,000 times in the Old Testament and can have several meanings (mostly, though, an ordinary day). Yet the only place in the Bible where Christians argue over what it means is in Genesis 1, where it could not be more obvious from the context.
They are telling the world that man’s fallible dating methods . . . can be trusted and the Bible has to be reinterpreted to fit.Ultimately, years of research and personal conversations have convinced me that the reason so many Christians won’t accept the six literal days of Creation is that they somehow want to allow for billions or millions of years to fit somewhere into history. Thus, they are telling the world that man’s fallible dating methods (there’s no hint of millions of years in the Bible) can be trusted and the Bible has to be reinterpreted to fit. When some Christians tell people that they really prefer to trust man’s word rather than God’s, these people see this inconsistency and lose respect for Christianity and the Bible.
The real issue is biblical authority—that’s what has been largely lost from our once very Christianized cultures. That’s why AiG makes such an issue of it. But isn’t six literal days just a “little thing,” so long as we believe the rest of God’s Word?
Well, how do you think the infinite Holy God of the universe, who is very jealous of His Word, sees it when we tell Him, in effect, “God, I really don’t care what your Word says in Genesis 1—but I believe the rest of it—that’s good enough, isn't it?” No, it’s not. God judged the Israelites for not believing His Word. Even when they brought Him sacrifices and prayed, He didn't hear their prayers because they didn’t take Him at His Word. Oh yes, they believed some of it, but God wants us to give Him the glory He deserves and believe all of it.
Not only that, but compromise with a six-day Creation ends up seriously undermining the gospel, because putting the millions of years (and thus the fossil record) into the six days puts death and disease before sin!2 Our increasingly secularized, immoral society has lost a belief in biblical authority because God’s people have signaled to the world that we don’t believe His Word, and that we tremble at man’s word instead (i.e., his dating methods and his fallible science). Until God’s people clearly teach and demonstrate to the world that we all need to tremble at the Word of God, biblical authority will not be restored.