Genesis 1:5b - What is a Day?
“And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” - Genesis 1:5
This is the first sunset and sunrise that God experienced on the earth. We know it was a sunset/sunrise because the context is day and night, the establishment of the light side of the earth’s sky and the dark. We know it was God experiencing it based on the supposition that Jesus witnessed creation, because the Holy Spirit was hovering over the waters with Jesus, and because Jesus was God’s instrument of creation. However, the creating of light in the sky surely took more than one solar day, so how could this be Jesus’ first sunset/sunrise?
The answer is that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were hovering over the deep, which implies they stayed in one place. Usually, remaining stationary would result in following a certain point of the earth, even as it rotates, experiencing day and night as that location does. However, Jesus wasn’t just creating over one part of the earth… He was creating over the entire thing, and therefore it seems more likely that the entire earth was under His view, therefore rotating past Him as He watched. From such a vantage point, Jesus would not experience sunset or sunrise… at least not until He chose to, allowing a “day” to last billions of years if that be His will.
This interpretation of a day is similar to the day-age theory, where every day represents an epoch or age of the earth. The difference is that in  the day-age theory, at least in the versions I have seen or read of, days are not sharply delineated and some even allow them to overlap.
Progressive Creation for example must allow for some overlap for bugs, which are necessary for certain plant life to flourish on Day 4, even while the animals that keep those bugs in check are not mentioned until Day 5. Another version of the Day-Age theory relegates all of God’s creative pronouncements to more of a planning session, a specification for the results of creation if you will. The sequence of development is then free to happen as it will, with some broad delineation between the eras that doesn’t fit the exact sequence of statements, yet accomplishes all that God pronounced.
The result of the Geocreatinist perspective is that every day does in fact map to a geologic age on the earth, and so Geocreationism could be considered a day-age theory. However, the day’s are not delineated in scripture by the end of an age per se, but rather by the specific and willful action of Jesus moving into the literal darkness of night at specific moment in time, and then later back into day again… a literal sunset and sunrise, if you will. A literal evening and literal morning was recorded because one literally happened… but from the position of one hovering over the earth, as opposed to one standing on its surface.
July 22nd, 2007 at 11:48 pm
[…] In my post, Genesis 1:5b - What is a Day?, I explain how a day in Genesis 1 is defined by when Jesus intentionally experienced evenings and mornings. However, I have received numerous responses of the following form: that “yom”, the word for day, always means 24-hour days, because its use in other scriptures are always meant to be treated as 24-hour days. Therefore, the argument goes, creation days, which use the same word “yom”, must by necessity be 24-hour days. In conclusion, I am twisting scripture to mean something it does not. Naturally, I disagree. […]
September 30th, 2010 at 7:23 am
I must admit that this seems a little bit like a stretch, though perhaps it is one way to reconcile the use of evening/morning/day here with billions of years. It makes some kind of sense, but it seems like it takes some serious work for the passage to take on this meaning. I guess what I’m thinking is: Why wouldn’t the author have been more clear about this? Do you see what I’m saying?
September 30th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
>>Why wouldn’t the author have been more clear about this? Do you see what I’m saying?
Yes, I do. Personally, I think Moses stuck to what he knew. He didn’t know how long a day was, so he never said how long. But, he knew that each day was marked by evening and morning, so he wrote that. He also knew the spirit of God was hovering over the deep, so He wrote that. The rest is left for interpretation…
Consider: Does the “earth” ever experience evening? Not as a whole. A place does, but the earth does not, because it is always morning somewhere, too. Yet, we know God did His creating during the day, and that evening always followed. So, unless Genesis is purely symbolic, God must have been creating from some physical perspective… and Genesis tells us that perspective: He was hovering over the deep, and hovering provides God the ability to stay in the day until He was done, however long that would be.
Consider also: once we see that a literal interpretation implies God chose a physical perspective, it suggest He physically saw His creation as well. So, how much did God “see” before declaring it good? Some of it, or all of it? If He hovered over one spot on the earth, then He only some of it; if He hovered beneath sun, then He would have seen all of it.
Finally, who did the creating? Combining John 1 and Proverbs 8, it would appear to be Jesus. Giving Jesus a physical perspective makes complete sense. He even has physical eyes with which to see. He even uses the Holy Spirit to transport Himself sometimes, and we know the Holy Spirit was hovering, so I think Jesus was within the Holy Spirit, and that the Holy Spirit was most likely in the form of a cloud.
To truly take the Genesis account literally, this is the only interpretation I can find that works, lest it ruduce to mere allegory… and once you embrace this, then opens up the possibilities to an old earth. For me, it was unavoidable.
October 1st, 2010 at 9:08 am
I think I see what you’re saying a little more now, but one statement still gets to me:
“ersonally, I think Moses stuck to what he knew. He didn’t know how long a day was, so he never said how long….”
It seems to me that Moses would certainly have known how long a day was. The argument you seem to be making is that he didn’t know how long the days were that he was writing about, but that just strikes me as odd. I prefer the day-age theory in the sense that a day for God is not the same as our own, and so when Moses used “day” he specifically meant it in correlation with the being he was discussing, namely, God. Perhaps this could bolster your argument as well?
October 1st, 2010 at 8:38 pm
Well, I’m sure Moses knew how long a day was in general. I just mean that he didn’t know how long a creation day was. If you advocate a Day-Age theory however, then do you agree that Moses did not know how long a creation Day was for God?
Here’s the thing that gets me: We know Jesus was at Creation doing the creating (John 1 + Proverbs 8 ). We know Jesus was with the Holy Spirit (Psalm 104). We know the Holy Spirit was hovering over the deep (Genesis 1:2). We know Jesus saw the entire earth before sunset. We know that each day ended with a sunset. We agree that each day maps to an age. To then conclude that God hovered in the sunlight until the end of that age does not seem to be that big a leap.
The reason I like this argument is because it is a literal interpretation, hence getting around a limitation that causes many scientifically-minded Christians to doubt their faith.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:58 pm
It is certainly interesting… I still just think it is a bit of a stretch. It seems like you have to read too much into what’s there. I think you have an interesting line of reasoning, I just don’t know if I personally buy it.
I think that Moses did know how long the days were he was referencing, though not necessarily down to the amount of years. He knew it was a long time, but not eternity. Hence, “day”, which elsewhere can mean much more time than 24 hours.