Creation in Six Days: A Defense of the Traditional Reading of Genesis One

by James B. Jordan

Jordan's account is primarily designed to answer any approach to the text of Genesis, such as the increasingly popular Framework Hypothesis, that pits the text's literary features against its historical and narrative sense, a move that reveals a latent Gnosticism. We're happy to announce that Jordan's position is in line with the Westminster Confession. Oh, and the Bible. p"This new book by James Jordan addresses with precision, charity, and biblical fidelity the strange and confusing situation amongst evangelical, Reformed scholars on the doctrine of creation." br-Douglas Kelly, Reformed Theological Seminary p"Jordan defends the traditional reading of the creation account with a command of biblical theology rarely encountered. But Jordan does more. He precisely and convincingly identifies exegetical errors in opposing positions. Moreover, he reveals the subtle influences of gnosticism and false assumptions of science which are behind modern interpretations. This is an outstanding contribution." br-Rev. James Bordwine, Th.D

Genres: Theology, Christian, Biblical Studies, Christianity, Audiobook, Reference, Cultural

272 pages, Paperback

First published December 6, 1999

About the author

James B. Jordan is a Calvinist theologian and author. He is director of Biblical Horizons ministries, a think tank in Niceville, Florida that publishes books, essays and other media dealing with Bible commentary, Biblical Theology, and liturgy.

Jordan was born in Athens, Georgia, and he attended the University of Georgia, where he received a B.A. in comparative literature and participated in Campus Crusade for Christ. He served as a military historian in the United States Air Force and attended Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi but ultimately earned an M.A. and Th.M. from Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with a master's thesis on slavery in the Bible. In 1993, he received a D.Litt. from the Central School of Religion for his dissertation on the dietary laws of Moses. From 1980 to 1990 Jordan was an associate pastor of a Presbyterian church in Tyler, Texas.

Reviews

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have appreciated James Jordan's body of work and read this more out of an interest in his work than an interest in entering into the creation/evolution/old-earth/young-earth debate. These things come up, unavoidably, but the book is not interested in those debates in the way most readers might expect.

Jordan is primarily interested in what the Bible has to say, and he'll go wherever he believes it is leading us. He begins the book by showing his commitments. He shows his commitment to the six 24 hour day creation and the consequent young-earth interpretation of Genesis right away. He is unswayed by the sophisticated arguments that attempt to solve what many scholars believe are apparent contradictions in the creation account.

Jordan argues that prior to the nineteenth century, the Church did not discuss apparent contradictions in the creation account, not seeing them because there are none. Unbiblical presuppositions have crept into the church undermining the traditional understanding of the creation account, that has led many scholars within evangelicalism to create various interpretations that accommodate the unbiblical assumptions brought to bear upon the text.

Jordan primarily engages with three writers: Meredith Kline and the Framework interpretation, John C. Collins' anthropomorphic days, and John Sailhammer's Limited Geography interpretation. These chapters are rich and valuable for their interpretation of the Bible as well as the rebuttals of these three positions.

But the real gem of the book is chapter four, "Gnosticism Versus History." In this chapter, he demonstrates the gnostic tendencies in evangelicalism, evidenced by a number of things, including the novel interpretations of the creation account.

For example, he writes:

"The Klinean [Meredith Kline] version of the Framework Interpretation, as defended by Irons, is sensitive to our charge. Irons insists that the Klinean version of the Framework Interpretation does not deny the specific events of Genesis 1, that it only denies that they happened in the order presented by the text. It is only the days, not the events of the days, that are not historical, or better, not earthly."

Jordan then goes on to argue that if this type of thing is challenged in the very first chapter of the first book of the Bible, what else might be so interpreted away? What of the Exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt? "Perhaps the sequence of ten plagues only took place in heaven; heavenly plagues as opposed to earthly plagues, as it were...Or maybe none of these events, as events, happened at all: The plagues on Egypt were not historical events; they are a foundational and archetypal myth for the nation of Israel, just as the six days of Genesis are a foundational and archetypal myth for the whole universe."

What of the resurrection? "If we approach the Bible the way the nonhistorical interpreters of Genesis 1 want us to, the Christian religion gradually disappears into gnosticism. By the same token, if we take other passages of the Bible in their obvious historical sense and resolve seeming contradictions in the way the Church as always done, then we must do the same with Genesis 1." p. 94

It is, of course, ironic, that in attempting to defend the Bible against liberalism, the defenders of orthodoxy open wide the door to liberalism by accepting their premises. Their defense is no defense at all; instead, it endangers the church by teaching the very methods of interpretation used by the liberals to those within the true church.

Of course, Jordan doesn't only engage with these three writers, but he offers his own interpretation, which does far more than simply assert that the Bible means what it says about six 24 hour days. He rigorously engages with the text and is more than satisfactory.

This is a great book, with the chapter on gnosticism being one of the most important chapters I've read in a very long time. Highly, highly recommended. I had this book on my wishlist for ten years longer than I should have.

[Grant Van Brimmer · Rating 5 out of 5]

great study arguing for normal 6 day creation...other interpretations are in one way or another, capitulations to pagan philosophies.

[Nate Hansen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really good.

[Peter Jones · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jordan is a very good exegete. In this book his dissection of the various views that do not see Genesis 1 as six literal 24 days is very good. He defends the literal six day view against Bruce Waltke and Meredith Kline's views. He points out how they create problems where none. I would have given this four stars, but Jordan's own view, while correct in many ways, is too laden with symbolism to be helpful to the novice. I do think much of his view point of Genesis 1 and the symbolism there is right, but in this book I felt he would have been better served to lay out simply and directly his own interpretation of Genesis 1. His chapter on gnosticism and history was superb. Overall, a good read, especially for those who are in evangelical circles where it is in vogue to reject the traditional reading of Genesis 1

[Emma R. Pilcher · Rating 4 out of 5]

This ranks among one of the better books I've read by James B. Jordan. It lurked amongst my ever-growing list of books to read for quite a while. But recently, my pastor recommended it to me, so I went ahead and read it. Overall...I'm glad I did. As per typical James B. Jordan, a few of his ideas seemed like outlandish speculations. HOWEVER, this is a solid work. Firstly, I am indebted to Pastor Jordan for bringing me to the realization that Meredith Kline is a male. I went through the entirety of Through New Eyes wondering why he kept quoting a lady on exegetical issues. How embarrassing. I probably should have read the footnotes.

A large portion of this book is given to refuting the Framework interpretation (espoused by Kline). Anthromorphism in addition to other views is refuted as well. What I found particularly applicable was his chapter on Gnosticism, which, as he demonstrates, so readily influences our theology. His arguments against the opposing views on creation in addition to his defense of the traditional view were incredibly thorough. A chiastic reading of Genesis seems interesting, and somewhat compelling. I wish he had given more attention to his argument against the Mosaic authorship of Genesis, but perhaps he's written on that issue elsewhere. He, instead, proposes that Joseph authored Genesis. I'll have to give that more thought.

3.5 stars.
This definitely deserves a more thorough reading, I'm sure there's a great deal that my finite brain missed.

[Peter Bringe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wonderful. This book contains a thoughtful and solid critique of non-literal/non-historical interpretations of Genesis 1 and defense of the traditional six 24-hour day creation view. It is also includes an insightful discussion of Gnosticism (i.e. "the tendency to replace the historic facts of Christianity with philosophical ideas…the tendency to de-historicize and de-physicalize the Christian religion," p. 71), as well as an investigation of Genesis 1-2 and a positive statement of its exposition.

While some of Jordan's interpretations will take some time to chew on, he adds much richness to our approach to Genesis that is sometimes lacking in modern creationist literature. Modern creationists are often scientists, not biblical scholars. James Jordan does an excellent job supplying this side of the discussion, both in his critiques of the Framework Interpretation in its various forms and in his positive exposition of Genesis. And his chapter on Gnosticism points to the larger issues at stake and reminds us why this is an important issue.

[Tim · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought he did a nice job explaining the errors with the framework interpretation and other hermeneutical methods of interpreting Genesis to better "fit" with modern science. He made a great case for plainly reading the text, and he unpacked some of the word choices, chiasms, and imagery. It challenged some of my presumptions, especially his view on Joseph being the author instead of Moses. The most convicting chapter was on the errors of gnosticism that so easily creep into our lives. I did not enjoy the narrator (too monotonous), and some of the chiasm diagrams were hard to follow in audio format. I would like to read it again in print.

[Aurora Grace · Rating 1 out of 5]

Here Jordan examines some of the prevailing scholarly theories about creation and Genesis 1-11, and after dismissing them and evolution, presents his own view, a young earth view that prioritizes giving humanity dominion over the earth.

[Douglas Wilson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Okay.

[Josiah Richardson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Just okay. This is more of a critique of the Framework Hypothesis than it is a defense of six-day creationism. Jordan tends to ramble on at times and clutters up some of the arguments he makes. At the same time, he is very thorough and you will understand some of the more complex intricacies involved in this discussion due to Jordan’s ability to reduce them to key points.

[Zack Freeman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really good on refuting errors, okay on his own views. A good bit of repetition used to refute different errors with similar roots, but overall a recommended read as it gets you thinking more seriously about Genesis 1.

[Jacob Hudgins · Rating 2 out of 5]

Came to this hoping for a basic defense of a literal reading of the days of creation. What I found was…not that.

Jordan critiques several Calvinist theologians who have rejected a literal reading (this is the first seven chapters; there are only 8). His main concern seems to be Waltke’s framework hypothesis. My issue is with his argumentation:

On how there can be light in Gen 1:3 before the sun in Gen 1:14: “Rather obviously, the light came from the Spirit, who frequently appears in a Shekinah glory of light in the Bible”(p 48). In what universe is this “rather obvious”?

On the seeming contradiction about plants in Gen 1:11 and 2:5: “Their creation was suspended until after man was made, for a reason implied in Genesis 3:18. God waited until He saw whether man would sin or not. If man did not sin, the shrubs would have been one kind of plant; since man sinned, they grew up as ‘thorns and thistles’”(p 54). I love declaring things emphatically that are purely guesswork!

“On the second day God took some of the earthly waters up above the firmament, and this can only mean that they were taken into the angelic heavens”(p 100). Oh it can only mean that?

These are only a sample of the bold, odd assertions he repeatedly makes—and then acts as though other views are the height of foolishness.

Jordan argues frequently from tradition, insisting that no one before the 19th century questioned a literal reading of Genesis. While I suspect this is not true, I am also unmoved by it. Why can human interpreters not be wrong? Haven’t they been before (geocentrism)?

Meanwhile, when given his chance to interpret Gen 1, his views are a bit outlandish. He also argues that angels are at work in the flow of electricity (and describes this as a fact, p 120).

I could go on. Not recommended.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jordan was the right guy to write this book. He doesn't write like a typical 6-Day creationist who is simply after what Genesis says historically, but also understands the literary depths and has had detailed interactions with the symbolism of the text. Often the Old Earthers get way too easy a pass on this issue, getting to keep their claim to be reading Genesis as poetry, not history. Jordan ably shows this is not an 'either-or' situation. I might critique some of his tone, but overall a fine book.

[Landon Coleman · Rating 2 out of 5]

Jordan offers some valid critiques of evangelicals who try to make the biblical creation account fit with the theories and assumptions of modern science. He highlights inconsistencies in interpretations, and he points out instances where evangelicals try to reconcile issues that are not in tension. Jordan rightly critiques his opponents for making claims instead of arguments, but in the final chapter Jordan does a good bit of this himself. His critiques are largely helpful, but his positive vision for making sense of Genesis 1 is a bit convoluted.

[Caleb M. Powers · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good rebuttal to conservatives whose first impulse is to fall in step with modernity on the issue of Genesis 1. Some of Jordan's more creative interpretations seemed unnecessary and detracted from what was otherwise a solid defense of the traditional reading of Genesis, but, on the other hand, Jordan's clear skill will literary allusion and chiastic structure did lend itself well to toppling the more esoteric of his opponents' attempts to downplay a literal reading.

All in all, recommended.

[Kyle Grindberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was the best book I've read on Genesis 1 and 2. Jordan always sticks very close to the text. Also, the chapter about Gnosticism is invaluable. Highly recommend it.

[Kevin Godinho · Rating 4 out of 5]

I bought this book mostly to read chapter 4 "Gnosticism Versus History." That chapter alone is worth the buy. Here is an excerpt to give you a taste of what James gets into:

"Gnosticism is not an ordinary heresy, because it does not manifest itself as a set of defined beliefs. Rather, gnosticism is a tendency: the tendency to replace the historic facts of Christianity with philosophical ideas. Gnosticism is the tendency to de-historicize and de-physicalize the Christian religion. Gnosticism transforms history into ideology and facts into philosophy. Gnosticism tends to see religion as man's reflections about God and reality instead of as God's revelation of Himself and His Word to man."

If you are looking for a book that defends the young earth creationist reading of Genesis, this is the one. There are a couple guys I get together with that lean toward theistic evolution. If you are anything like me and need someone to break down the traditional reading because you don't want to get carried away placing science over the Word, pick this book up. You won't be disappointed.

There are so many gems in this book. James drops many theological insights from the beginning chapters of Genesis, most of which I've never come close to noticing before. It will take a lot more time and much further reading to even begin unpacking everything he discusses.

--------------------

Consider checking out by blog:
https://laymansprogress.com/

or following me on Instagram:
@laymansprogress

[Will Dole · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jordan’s writing is…eccentric.

He thoroughly critiques some of the leading evangelical positions on Genesis 1 which fall outside of the “traditional” reading. He does so on an exegetical basis, which is what I care about; the whole “creation-science” thing is of pretty secondary concern to me. I just want to read the text as accurately as possible, and Jordan ably points to numerous holes in the exegetical gymnastics many modern evangelicals seem involved in.

Having said that, some of his positive proposals are head-scratchers. He is adamantly opposed to reading days 1-3 (form) and 4-6 (fill) in a parallel fashion (which pattern most scholars see, whether they take they days literally or not). His argument for a chiastic reading was intricate, confusing, and left me saying, “why do you make things so hard when they don’t need to be?”

His insights on waters above/below on day 2 were helpful for me, and for that I’m profoundly grateful.

3.5 stars.

[K. · Rating 3 out of 5]

For anyone familiar with Jordan, there isn't much new material here. most of it is taken from a series of Biblical Chronology letters and slightly modified. It is a shame that this book was written before John Walton became popular, because it would have been interesting to see interactions between Jordan and him. His most extensive interaction is with Sailhamer (whom I haven't read). His critique of the framework hypothesis is relatively incisive, and the basic point that even if such a hypothesis is accurate, it does not rule out a six-day interpretation is worth noting. I think Through New Eyes and Trees and Thorns (which is hard to find and can most easily beobtained through Jordan's collection at Word MP3.com) contain more material on the same subject and are likely to better survive the test of time.

This book was provided to me free by the author.

[John Rimmer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really appreciated how this book took aim at the various incarnations of the literary framework hypothesis readings of Genesis rather than dealing with foes long ago rendered harmless (e.g. Day-age theories, etc.). I especially appreciated how Jordan deals with these threats by showing how they are in fact not literary enough in their understandings of the book to prove their points. Jordan in this book and his other work "Primeval Saints" opens the book of Genesis up to greater depths than these other so-called defenders of the text, highlighting the details and complexities left on the plate by casual readings and syncretistic exegesis. Anyone who would wish to benefit from, not a new take, but a richer read of Genesis would do well to read and interact with Jordan's books.

[Jason Bray · Rating 4 out of 5]

I generally really liked it. Able commentary on the various symbolic representative theories of Genesis. Good reason in chapter 6, why the scientific arguments are not as solid as one might hope.

However, it gets pretty in the weeds about various theories, which is more or less applicable, depending on the similarity of what you are arguing against to the views that he is arguing against.

Also, his view, while it has much to recommend it, is a lot of novel discussions about chiastic structure and the like. Would have been better to fully flesh out these various things because the information he gives leaves you saying: okayyy interesting but, I don’t really feel you proved your point.

[Nathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

James Jordan!! Great book showing you how to do exegesis of the Bible. This is a devastating critique of all the other views of Genesis that don't hold to six normal days of creation.

And of course along the way Jordan likes to provoke everybody. He has little asides now and then that will really annoy even people who hold the same view of creation as him. I love when he does that. We should be able to challenge one another and have a dialogue about things.

If you don't like Jordan, this book will annoy you. But you need to read it and take his challenges seriously. That's because all he does is rub your nose in the Bible.

[Lance Conley · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think it’s a great book to read. While I disagree with some of his conclusions and am not a YEC myself in the mainstream sense (I think the truth is somewhere in the middle between old and young earth creationist personally), I think his book is a good work and he really does make brilliant points on chiastic structures. The traditional way of looking at Genesis I think he makes his case quite well.

[William Schrecengost · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really good. He doesn't go as indepth in his critics as Gentry does, instead Jordan boils down the argument to its foundational arguments and disproves those. One of the best parts was his Chiasm Appendice where he takes the lame excuse of Framework Advocates that they're just following the literary structure and thoroughly destroys it. I also enjoyed his Meredith Kline chapter. He takes a lot from Kline in his other works and I enjoy seeing scholars being able to disagree on different points.

[Nate Walker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some brilliant observations of Gen 1 and the biblical story. Definitely revived the part of me that wants to be young earth. But some ideas seem far-fetched, and he often dismisses people who disagree with him too easily. This is book is missing some humility that would at least admit the universe looks old, and that is a problem for the 6-day creationist.

[Matt · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a mixed bag. Part of that is because I had already read much of these critiques before and had listened to Jordan talk about the gnostic tendencies in the church before. As is typical of Jordan, he has some brilliant insights along with some which seem like huge stretches.

[Melissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little more technical than I had anticipated, but the chapter on how gnosticism has affected the popular evangelical view on creation and the chapter on Jordan’s view on the six days of creation are worth the price of the book and more.

[Thomas Kidd · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent book—the best I’ve read—on the hermeneutical issues in Waltke and Kline’s interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2. While there are parts of Jordan's own view that may not have convinced me, his ability to bring out the chiastic structure while maintaining the factuality was very helpful.

[Josh Shelton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jordan and Kline are the two most insightful writers I've read on Genesis 1-6

[S. Paterson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tannins (aquatic dinosaurs) — the mighty Father
Fishes (sea) — the Son (the Fisher of Men)
Birds (air and land) — the hovering Spirit.