The Genesis Debate: Three Views on the Days of Creation

by J. Ligon Duncan III, Hugh Ross, David W. Hall

Are the Genesis creation days 24 hours long? Ages of time? Or a literary framework? In The Genesis Debate, three teams of evangelicals committed to the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture tackle this question head-on by presenting and defending their respective views in a lively, yet friendly, forum. J. Ligon Duncan III and David W. Hall defend the view that the Genesis creation days are six, sequential days, each 24 hours long (the 24-hour view). Hugh Ross and Gleason L. Archer defend the view that the Genesis creation days are six sequential ages of time of unspecified but finite duration (the day-age view). And Lee Irons with Meredith G. Kline defend the view that the Genesis creation days are presented as normal days, but that the picture of God's creating in six days and resting on the seventh is figurative (the Framework view). Whether you are new to the creation-day debate or have followed it for some time, The Genesis Debate will deepen your understanding and strengthen your faith.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Science, Christianity, Biblical Studies

319 pages, Paperback

First published November 24, 2000

About the author

Ligon Duncan is the Senior Minister of the historic First Presbyterian Church (1837), Jackson, Mississippi, President of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, Chairman of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Convener of the Twin Lakes Fellowship, and Adjunct Professor at Reformed Theological Seminary. He served as the 32nd Moderator of the Presbyterian Church in America (2004-2005), the youngest minister ever to fill that post.

Reviews

[Adam Omelianchuk · Rating 3 out of 5]

I came to this text not particularly interested in the subject matter, but became more interested as I read along. As with most perspective books, the quality of the essays are uneven. The twenty-four hour view is not well represented as it tediously refers to church history ad nauseum (and in my opinion engages in a reverse form of chronological snobbery). The day-age view often deviates from the immediate context of Genesis One to exposit all the ways the natural sciences are compatible with it, which is kind of interesting (but it end up being thin on exegesis). The proponents of the Framework view provide an excellent case for a more figurative reading and respond to the critiques adequately. I was pleasantly surprised by its quality and think that it deserves a wide reading.

While I noticed many typos, I am glad the editor included follow up responses of the proponents to the critiques of their opponents. I am sure there are better presentations of the all the views out there, but this volume brings them all together in one nice place that comprehensively addresses all the relevant details.

[Matthew Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good introduction for anyone wanting to see interaction between multiple views of the days of Genesis. I found the Framework view to be the best argued and presented view of the three. Duncan and Hall (who represented the 24 hour view) have the weakest presentation of the three. At times I found myself skipping through many of their arguments because they were either repeated or just plain frustrating to read. I thought they could have gotten better representatives for this view or at least asked the current proponents to interact exegetically with the other two views. Overall good book for anyone interested in the days of creation.

[Brian Park · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very thorough for a relatively short book on very complicated and interdisciplinary issue. Gives a good overview on the major perspectives on the debate, though it's unfortunate that significant alternative positions were omitted (one could legitimately disagree with all the authors), but understandable since such a book would have been either unwieldy or sparse in content. Would have given 5 stars if the 24-hour proponents were more charitable and less condescending in their tone.

[Rod Innis · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book gives three different views on creation.
No one will agree with all three. But it was valuable to see
what those who reject the Genesis account as literally true
are saying.

[Hope · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book but hard read, you really have to understand the book of Genesis before reading this.

[Kevin Sheth · Rating 4 out of 5]

As others have said, pretty uneven. 24 hour was the weakest and framework was the strongest. The book is dated but I doubt the arguments have changed much from any of the views presented.

[Grace · Rating 2 out of 5]

I suppose if you want an overview of interpretations of the creation narrative, this gives you an overview of interpretations of the creation narrative. On the whole, though, I found it unfortunately tone-deaf and not particularly well-argued.

The 24-hour day argument in particular suffered from overstatement, lack of organization, and pretty thoroughly missing the points made by the others. The day-age argument focused more on science than on exegesis, and after reading the critiques of both, I find myself extremely skeptical about their use of church history and mildly skeptical about their scientific explanations. The framework argument was at least decently written, but (and this is the charitable interpretation) suffered from a lack of space to back up some of its more debatable claims (e.g. esp. the interpretation of Gen. 1:1 that defines "heaven" as the upper register and "earth" as the lower register, including both the earth proper and the visible heavens).

My biggest takeaway from the book is that it is really, really important to learn how to write well. It's important to learn how to structure an argument well. It's important to learn how to listen to the definitions of terms in the way that your opponent is using them and then make appropriate clarifications. And it's really important to hit your rhetorical registers in the right way, because when you don't it causes problems where there don't need to be problems.

[Catherine Gillespie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found The Genesis Debate: Three Views on the Days of Creation incredibly helpful and thought-provoking. The book is set up like a debate, with proponents of each of the three creation views deemed orthodox by reformed Christians presenting an opening essay, and then the other positions writing an essay in response, with a concluding essay by the initial team. I appreciated that all of the authors were committed to “the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation” and that the focus of the debate remained, for the most part, on the study of what the Bible actually says, rather than devolving into speculation and theorizing that can’t be either proven or disproven by the text.

Each of the sections--the 24 hour view, the day-age view, and the framework view--presents rigorous study and exegesis of the Scripture, as well as thoughtful and reasoned debate firmly grounded in the commitment that the Bible is God’s word, that God created the earth ex nihilo (out of nothing) and that God made man in His own image. I think that’s why I found the book so helpful–the views presented, while divergent in interpretation, were not different in ultimate worldview.

{Read my full review here}

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tone. Tone. Tone. An excellent example of the weight of our tone when we dialogue with others, especially when we disagree. The Genesis Debate is a unique and exemplary presentation of three understandings of the nature of the creation days- 24 Hours, Day- Age, and Literary Framework... A readable introduction to three understandings that are held by scholars who all affirm the inerrancy of Scripture. I learned a lot from each presentation and the subsequent interactions among the scholars, but the most useful take-away lessons are: listen well! And, be respectful! The contributors demonstrate varying degrees of competency here, and these behaviors carry surprising weight in the debate.

[Patrick]

This is a great book for those interested in the debate over how to interpret the "days" in Genesis. It features the three currently most popular view points (Framework hypothesis, Day-Age view, and 6 24-hour days). Each author is given a chance to present their view point, comment on concerns they have with the other views, and defend their view against the criticisms of the other authors. It is also the only major book I know of in which Lee Irons (a personal favorite theologian of mine) has contributed.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

set in a form of a debate, this book give a overall arguments for the 3 most popular views on the creation narrative. because of the nature of the book, some may feel there is not much depth in discussion for each of the positions. but, the authors provide enough references to help the readers do further research if desired. personally, i came to this book subcribing to the framework view and my position stands.

[Stinger · Rating 3 out of 5]

When addressing the interpretation of the opening chapters of Genesis, one must first identify the most important question, “What does Scripture itself say about the Genesis creation days? Even more precisely: Are the creation days 24 hours, ages, or a literary framework?" This is the question and these are the views propounded in this book. For my part I found the authors of the 24 hour view least convincing and the authors of the literary framework view most convincing.

[Scott Korljan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very through look at three different views on the days of creation. It has a better format than most "3 views" books in that the author of the original essay gets a chance to respond to the critiques of his position. Good for teaching preparation, which is what I used it for. What view am I? I couldn't say...

[Hank Pharis · Rating 2 out of 5]

As with most of the multiple views books this does an excellent job of stating, defending
and refuting three different interpretations of Genesis 1-2. However they are more successful
at refuting each other's views than at proving their own.

[CL · Rating 2 out of 5]

The format is ideal for a written debate - however some of the level of scholarship is not ideal for this weighty of a topic.

[Lu Tsun · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am 98% convinced by the framework view of six-day creation after reading this book.

[Josh Shelton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Literary framework view is definitely the best view presented in this work.

[Michael Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not a Framework advocate, but judging from the cogency and exegetical fidelity to Scripture, there is no doubt who won this "debate." Poor performance by Duncan and Hall.

[Kristen Davis · Rating 1 out of 5]

Better representations for each of the views could have been found. Unfair portrayal of the presented views.

[Aubrey Clark · Rating 3 out of 5]

2 out of the 3 viewpoints were well argumented. Disappointed in the 24-hour view's lack of exegesis in his defense.