Six-day creation, Part 2: A plain reading

One of the reasons that newspapers have enjoyed such popularity through the seasons is that they are easy to read. The tone and placement of the article usually makes it clear whether your ingesting investigative reporting or if it's a just-the-facts news story. Most folks beyond the first grade understand that a movie review should be read differently from how the Twins did last night (beat the Red Sox, by the way, and are still one game up in the AL Central) from how Iron Man is doing at the box office.

So why do we have issues with the Bible?

Folks cry out that "you can interpret the Bible any way you want to," but they never do that to a newspaper. Why is that? Is it because if they read it plainly, they would be responsible to the God who created them? Perhaps. Really, though, the Bible is no more difficult to read than any other piece of literature. It's the content that troubles most folks.

When you begin "in the beginning" at Genesis 1:1, you find historical narrative, the telling of a story from days past. Apart from a few genealogical listings, that is pretty much all you find in Genesis. What's that mean? You'd read it as history. It doesn't read like poetry. There are no clues to take us in that direction. It doesn't read fantastic and mythological. It's very benign history.

As such, if you were to sit down and read the Bible generally and Genesis specifically, using common literary understanding, you come away with the creation in six literal days.

What about:

• With God a day is like 1000 years?
• The Hebrew word also meaning "era" or "during the time of?"

Those questions will be answered in the next couple of posts, but a larger and oft ignored question is the question I'll leave you to chew upon with your family and friends:

Does it matter?

I believe it does. We'll talk about it.