7 Days of Revelation: Unveiling the Divine Creation

Days of Revelation or Creation?

The interpretation of the six days of creation in the book of Genesis has been a topic of debate among Christians who seek to reconcile the biblical account with scientific theories such as evolution. One theory suggests that these six days were not actual days of creation but rather days in which God revealed the process of creation to humanity. This theory, known as the "revelation" theory, proposes that the days described in Genesis 1 are symbolic and represent periods of time during which God communicated the story of creation to Moses.

It is important to note that all three views - the day-age theory, gap theory, and revelation theory - share the assumption that some form of evolution took place over billions of years. The day-age theory seeks to find a parallelism between the days in Genesis and the geological ages, while the gap theory proposes that there was a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 during which evolution or a reconstruction of the earth occurred. The revelation theory, on the other hand, allows for evolution to take place independently of the narrative in Genesis by applying the time-frame to God's communication with Moses.

The revelation theory is closely related to the gap theory, as both theories accept a literal interpretation of Hebrew "yom" (day) in this context. According to Hebrew scholarship, "yom" can only mean an ordinary day in this context, as each day is described as having "an evening and a morning." If long periods of time were intended, a different word would have been used. This linguistic understanding supports the idea that the days were meant to be understood as actual days of creation.

One prominent proponent of the revelation theory is Air-Commodore P.J. Wiseman, an Assyriologist and author of "Creation Revealed in Six Days." However, it is worth noting that there are differences among those who hold this view. Bernard Ramm, for example, believes in multiple theories, including the pictorial-day theory and progressive creationism, which he combines into a "pictorial-revelatory" perspective. While there are variations within the revelation theory, the general idea is to interpret the six days as a period of storytelling rather than literal creation.

Despite these interpretations, there is little Scriptural basis for believing that the six days were solely days of revelation and not days of actual creation. A natural reading of the text suggests otherwise. Wiseman argues that Hebrew "asah" (make) can be translated as "show," but this interpretation is unsupported by reputable scholars and goes against the clear meaning of the word. "Asah" denotes making or producing when used with concrete nouns like "heavens," "earth," or "man."

It is important to consider the genre and purpose of Genesis 1. While some may argue that it is poetic or symbolic, Hebrew scholars have noted that it lacks the characteristics of Hebrew poetry. The narrative in Genesis 1 intends to describe facts rather than appearances or visions. Thus, it is more appropriate to interpret the days as literal days of creation rather than symbolic periods of storytelling.

Why This Matters:

The interpretation of the six days of creation has implications for our understanding of the biblical account and its compatibility with scientific theories. The revelation theory attempts to reconcile biblical teachings with evolutionary ideas by suggesting that the days of creation were not meant to be taken literally. However, a closer examination reveals that this interpretation lacks solid linguistic and scriptural support.

Think About It:

How does accepting the revelation theory impact our understanding of God's creative power? Does it diminish the significance of His direct involvement in shaping the world? What are potential challenges or difficulties in interpreting biblical texts with a literal perspective? How can we navigate these challenges while remaining faithful to Scripture?