8/11/2019 7thday

1/2

IS THE SEVENTH DAY OF GODS REST STILL CONTINUING?Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

On occasion,thosepeoplewhobelieve inwhat isknown astheDay-AgeTheory (the idea theeachof the days of Creationasrecordedin Genesis 1 were long agesof time ofmillionsorbillionsof yearseach)sometimessuggest that theseventhdaystilliscontinuing.Theirargumentis thatsinceeveningandmorn-ing is not mentioned in regard to the seventh day, it must nothavebeena 24-hour day.Therefore, wearelivingin theseventhdaya position they must defend to remain consistent. Thereare,however, a number ofseriousproblemswiththisapproach.ThefirsthasbeenexplainedbyWoods.

Jehovahfinishedhislaborsattheendofthesixthday,andontheseventhrested.Thenarrative providesnobasis fortheassumption that thedayheresteddifferedin anyfash-ionfrom those whichprecededit. Itevidentlywasmarkedout and its length determined in the same manner as theothers.Ifitwasnotadayoftwenty-fourhours,itsustainsno resemblance to thesabbath which was givento theIs-raelites(1976,pp.17-18).

Mosesobvious intentwas forthe readerto understand that God:(1) rested (past tense); and (2) gave the seventh day (the Sab-bath)asadayofrestbecauseHehadrestedon thatday.

There isa secondproblemwith theview that theseventh daystilliscontinuing.JamesPilgrimhasaddressedthatproblem.

...if theday-age theorists acceptdayseven as an age

also, we ask, What about day eight, or day nine, or dayten...?On the assumption that theearthis 7,000 yearsold(a mostdistinctpossibility), letthe day-ageproclaim-ers put2,555,000 days (7,000yearsat365days peryear)ona page.Nowlet themcirclethe daywhichbegan thenormal24-hourday. Letthemalsogivejustone scripturereferenceto substantiatethe validity of thatcircle.Can theydo it?No! Will they do it?No! (1976,118[33]:522,emp.inorig.).

Thethirdproblemwith theidea that theseventhdayis continu-inghastodowithAdam,asWoodshasnoted:

Adam, the first man, was created in the sixthday, livedthrough the seventh day, and intoat least a portion of theeighthday. If these days were long geologic periods ofmillions ofyears in length, we have theinterestingsitua-tionof Adamhavinglived ina portionofone age, throughthe whole ofanother age,and intoat least a portion of athird age, inwhich case hewasmanymillionsof yearsoldwhenhefinally died!Sucha viewof courseis absurd; andso are the premises which would necessitate it (p. 18,emp.inorig.).

Whitcomb has explainedwhythese things are true:

...Genesis2:2addsthat Herested ontheseventh day. Thatdayalsomusthavebeenliteral,becauseotherwisethesev-enth day which God blessed and sanctified would have

been cursed when God cursed the world and cast AdamandEve outof theGarden.You see, theseventhday musthaveendedandthenextweekcommencedbeforethatAd-amic curse could have come.Adamand Evelived through

theentireseventhdayandintothefollowingweek,whichissimplyaconfirmationofthefactthateachofthedays,in-cludingtheseventh,wasliteral(1973,2:64-65).

It also has been suggested that Hebrews 4:4-11, where thewriter speaks of the continuationof Gods Sabbath rest, pro-vides support for the Day-Age Theory. First, I would like topresentthepassageinquestionalongwiththeargumentmadefromit. ThenI would liketo offer an explanation of why the passagedoesnot lend credence to the Day-Age Theory and why the argument based on it is faulty. Here is the passage.

Forhehath said somewhere oftheseventh dayon thiswise,And God rested on the seventh day from all his works;andin this placeagain,They shall notenter into myrest.Seeing thereforeit remaineth thatsomeshould enter there-into,andtheytowhomthegoodtidingswerebeforepreach-edfailedtoenterbecauseofdisobedience,heagaindefinetha certainday,Today, saying in Davidso long a time af-terward (even as hath beensaid before),Todayifye shallhear hisvoice,Hardennot your hearts. Forif Joshuahadgiven them rest, he would not have spoken afterward ofanother day. There remaineththereforea sabbath restforthe peopleof God.Forhe thatis entered intohis resthathhimself also rested from his works, as God did from his.Letus therefore give diligence to enter into that rest, thatnomanfallafterthesameexampleofdisobedience.

Here is the argument.Proponents of the Day-AgeTheorysuggest that since Gods Sabbath Day(the seventhdayof thecreation week) continues to this very day, then it follows logicallythattheotherdaysofthecreationweekwerelongperiodsoftimeas well (see Ross, 1994, pp. 48-49,59-60; Geisler and Brooks1990,p.230).Insupportofthisposition,HughRosswrote:Further information about theseventhday isgiven in Hebrews4...we learn that Gods day of rest continues (1994, p. 49).

Wrong! Here is the correct meaning of the passage. Whilethetext speaksclearly of thecessationbeginningon theseventhdayofGods creative activity, thattextnowheresuggests thaGods seventhday hascontinued from thepast into thepresentNor does the passage speak of the duration of the seventh day

VanBebberandTaylorhaveaddressedthispoint.Like Davidin thePsalms, thewriter of Hebrews iswarn-ingthe elect notto be disobedientand hard-hearted. Thus,healludestoIsraelinthewildernesswhobecauseoftheirhardheartscouldnotreceiveGodspromiseofrestinCa-naan. Rest, as used in these verses by both David andthewriterofHebrews,had a specifichistoricreferencetothe promised land of Canaan.The HebrewwordusedbyDavidforrestwas menuwchah,whichisageneraltermforrestwhichhasaspecial locational emphasis(e.g.,theresting place or abode of resting) [see Brown, et al.,1979, p. 629b]. This concept is echoed by the author ofHebrewswhouses theGreekwordkatapausis,whichalsomayrefertoanabodeorlocationofresting(Hebrews4:1,3-5,8).

ARTICLE REPRINTAPOLOGETICS PRESS

8/11/2019 7thday

2/2

At the climax of this passage, the author promises a fu-turedayofrest(Hebrews4:9,Greek:Sabbatismos).Thisis the only time in the New Testament that this word forrest is employed. It seems to be a deliberate referencetoDay Seven ofCreation.The author doesnot say, how-ever, that theseventhday continueson into thefuture.HeusesSabbatismoswithout an article (like saying aSab-

bath, rather than the Sabbath). In Greek, this grammati-cal structurewould generallyrepresent the characterornature of Day Seven, without really being Day Seven.

That is, the context makes it clear that the future day ofrest will be similar to the original seventh day. The taskwill be complete;we will livewith Christeternallyourworkonearthwillbedone(1996,pp.72-73,emp.,paren-thetical,andbracketeditemsinorig.).

Thepassage inHebrews isusing theessence of theseventhdayofcreationtorefertothecoming essenceofheaveni.e.,aplaceof rest. It isnotspeakingabout theactual length of thatseventhday. Furthermore, thefact that Godhasnotbeen involved in cre-ative activitysince theclose of day six says absolutely nothingaboutthedurationoftheindividualdaysofcreation.WhenGodcompleted thecreation,He restedbut only fromHis work ofcreation.Heisverymuchatworknowbut inHisworkofre-demption, notcreation.JesusHimself said:MyFatherworkethevenuntilnow(John 5:17).While it is correct tosaythat Gods

rest from creative activity continues to this very hour, it is notcorrect tosaythatHisSabbath Daycontinues.Thatwasnotthepoint the Hebrewwriter was trying to make, and to suggest thatit was represents eithera misunderstanding or misuse(orboth)ofthepassage.

Godwasnot saying,viatheHebrewwriter, thatHewantedtosharea literal Sabbath Days rest with Hiscreation.Rather, Hewas saying thatHe intended toenjoy a rest thatwas typifiedbytheSabbathDays rest.The Israelites whorebelledagainstGodin thewilderness were notable to shareeithera restby enter-ing into the physical presence of the promised land or a restby entering intotheeternal presenceof God.Lenski commentedonthetextasfollows:

Thepoint lies in taking allthese passagestogether.The

rest from which the Jews of theExodus were excluded,intowhichweareentering,isGodsrest,thegreatSabbathsincetheseventh day, ofcourse notof the earthlydaysandyears that have rolled by since then and arestill continu-ingbutthetimeless,heavenlystatethathasbeenestab-lished andintended formen intheirglorious unionwithGod.

Thesearenot differentkindsofrest: therestofGodsincecreationandafuturerestforhispeople;orarestintowhichmen havealreadyenteredandonethat hasbeenestablishedsince the redemptive work of Jesus, into which they areyet to enter; or a rest at the conclusion of the history ofmankind. The seventh day after the six days of crea-tion was a day of twenty-four hours. OnthisdayGoddidnot create. Thus Godmade thefirst seven-day week

(Exod. 20:8-11; 31:12-17), and the Sabbath of rest wasa sign (v. 17)so that at everyrecurrenceof this seventhdayIsraelmightnotethesignificanceofthis sign, this sev-enthday ofrestbeing a type anda promise of the rest in-stituted formansince thedays of creation. Like Canaan,the Sabbath was a type and a promise of thisrest(1966,

pp.132-133,emp.added).

Additionally, evenif itcouldbeproven somehowthat thesev-enth day of creation were longer than the others (which it can-not), that stillwouldestablish only onethingthat theseventhdaywas longer. Itwouldsayabsolutely nothing about thelengthof theothersix days.Andconcerning thosedays, theBiblecouldnot be any clearer than it is in explaining their duration of ap-proximatelytwenty-fourhours. Genesis1 definesthemas peri-odsof evening andmorning (1:5, 8,13,19,23,31).WhileGods

activity withineach literal daymayhavebeen miraculous, thereisnothing miraculous about the length of thedays themselvesTheywere,quitesimply, thesamekindsofdays thatwetodayenjoy. Attemptsto reinterpret themessage of Hebrews4 donoalter thatfact.

I would like to offer those who are enamored with the Day-AgeTheory thefollowing challenge (asset forth by Fields) foserious and thoughtful consideration:

It is our conclusion, therefore, that the Day-Age Theory

is impossible. It is grammatically and exegetically pre-posterous. Its only reason for existence is its allowanceforthe time needed by theevolutionarygeologyand bi-ology. We wouldliketo suggest two coursesof actionforthose who so willingly wed themselves to such extrava-gant misinterpretations of theScripture: either (1)admitthat the Bible and contemporaryuniformitarian geologyare at odds, reject biblical creation, and defend geologi-caland biological evolution over billions of years;or (2)admit thatthe Bible andcontemporaryuniformitariange-ology are at odds,studyallthe geological indicationsofthe recent creationoftheearth,accepttheimplicationsofNoahs flood,andbelievethe recentcreationismof theBible.One must chooseeitherthe chronological schemeof uniformitarianism or thechronological schemeof theBible,butthe inconsistenciesof thissort of interpreta-

tion of theHebrew textfor thepurpose of harmonizingmutually exclusive and hopelessly contradictory po-sitions can no longer be tolerated (1976, pp. 178-179,emp.inorig.exceptforlastsentence).

REFERENCES

Geisler,NormanL. andRonald M.Brooks(1990), WhenSkeptics Ask(Wheaton, IL: Victor).

Fields,WestonW. (1976),Unformed and Unfilled(Grand Rapids,MIBaker).

Lenski,R.C.H.(1966),TheInterpretationof theEpistle to theHebrewsandoftheEpistleofJames (Minneapolis,MN:Augsburg).

Pilgrim,James (1976),Day Seven, Gospel Advocate,118[33]:522August12.

Ross, Hugh (1994), Creation and Time (Colorado Springs, CO:Nav

press).Van Bebber, Mark and Paul S. Taylor (1996),Creation and Time: A

Report on the Progressive Creationist Book by Hugh Ross (Gilbert,AZ:Eden Communications).

Whitcomb, John C. (1973), The Days of Creation, And God Created, ed.Kelly L. Segraves (San Diego,CA:Creation-ScienceResearchCenter),2:61-65.

Woods, Guy N. (1976),Questions and Answers: Open Forum(Henderson,TN:Freed-HardemanUniversity).

ARTICLE REPRINT IS THE SEVENTH DAY OF GODS REST STILL CONTINUING? Bert Thompson, Ph.D

ARTICLE REPRINT

Distributed byApologetics Press, Inc.

230 Landmark DriveMontgomery, AL 36117-2752

(334) 272-8558

Originally Published InC r e a t i on C o m p r o m i s es , second edition

Apologetics Press, Montgomery, Alabama2000, pp. 211-216