(6) In addition to the argument in (1) above, we cannot know for certain that the earth was originally revolving at the same speed as it is today, therefore the days, hours, minutes and seconds may not have been of the same length as they are today. To argue that they must have been the same length as now would leave one open to the charge of holding uniformitarianism.
(7) It could also be said that at the creation we are in a different time frame. What were days to the bystanders at the creation may be years to us. (I refer here to Einstein's theory of relativity which postulates that for someone travelling near to the speed of light a day would have passed, while countless years would have passed to someone living on earth)
The arguments set out above can be refuted, at least partly, on the following grounds:-
(1) The light by which we live today comes from the heavenly bodies, but light
existed before the heavenly bodies were created. If light existed before the
creation of these bodies it would not appear that days and nights could not also
have existed. In Revelation 21:23 we find that the heavenly city has no need
of the sun nor of the moon, that they should shine for it; for the glory of God
has enlightened it, and the lamp thereof is the the Lamb (see also Rev 22:5). In that day there will, of course, be no days and nights, for night shall not be any more.
It may be noted that days as we know them could in any case have existed with
effect from the fourth day as the sun was created then. As to the length
of the first three days there is no indication that they were any different
from the last four and there is nothing to indicate that they were either longer
or shorter than days as we know them. Introducing the light in verse 3 would
not I think have required a vast period of time any more than switching on a
light does today.
It may be mentioned here that God created the light first, not that He needed the
light to see by (Psalm 139:12) but, because He desired that his work should be
seen by others. Perhaps this is a point in favour of the thought that
the record is that of angelic beings who witnessed it.
(2) The evening and the morning making up a day may simply be another way of
saying that nighttime plus daytime equals one day i.e. 24 hours. In Proverbs
7:9 the evening appears to be equated with the darkness and the morning is
connected with the light in 1 Samuel 25:34 & 36. In any case what would be the
point of speaking of millions of years as if they were a day ? Would we
be expected to infer that there was only one evening and one morning in such an enormous span of time ? What, for instance, would have been the effect on the earth's surface of one half being always in the light and the other half always being in the dark ?
(3) 2 Peter 3:8 only speaks of a thousand years not millions, as do evolutionists.
If we were to substitute "millions" where the Scripture says "a thousand" it
might be inferred that the Lord's second coming could be millions of years
away ! Further, although the force of 2 Peter 3:8 is that the Lord does not live in
time as we know it, it could just as easily be inferred from the passage that a day
of man's time is a thousand years to God and that consequently the days of
Genesis 1 were only one thousanth of our days ! After all, assuming that the
creation came into being immediately after God spoke as Psalm 33:9 appears to
state there does not appear to be enough activity to occupy more than a
minute of each day ! However, we must not leave out of account the fact
that what is seen in Genesis is the effect of God's word, and that behind the scenes God was dealing with the detail (see for instance Psalm 8:3 "the work of thy fingers" and Psalm 102:25 "the work of thy hands" - passages relating to the creation of the heavens).
(4) No one I think would ever suggest that prophetic days represent millions of
years. Apart from this the evenings and mornings of Daniel 8:14 are usually