NOTE:
This article is actually the text from my booklet entitled “Creation in Six Days”. I have primarily placed it here to more expediently address this issue for those who attended my sessions at the recent “No Regrets Conference” at
Elmbrook
Church. This question always arises during the Q&A session, but we never have time to address it properly, so I am directing attendees to this page for a more complete response
Great efforts have been expended in attempt to harmonize the creation account as found in Genesis 1 with various conclusions of modern science. The traditional view of Genesis is that it conveys the idea that God created everything out of nothing in the period of 6 ordinary days, beginning approximately 6,000 years ago.
In stark contrast to this traditional view is that idea that the universe began with a “big bang” approximately 14 billion years ago, which is the prevailing view among the majority of modern scientists.
This being the case, many within Christianity have sought harmony between the Bible and modern science through a re-evaluation of the Genesis narrative. One of the most popular “solutions” is known as the “Day-Age” theory. This theory, as the name implies, purports that “days” mentioned in Genesis 1 are not really ordinary days as we experience them, but actually great “ages” consisting of millions or billions of years each. God’s “creation week”, rather than being 7 days long, was actually billions of years in duration.
Simple solutions are always refreshing. William of Ockham (English logician and Franciscan friar, 14th century) is famous for establishing a principle that today is referred to as “Occam’s Razor” (or “Ockham’s Razor”). In essence, it states that the best solution to a particular situation is most often the one which is the simplest or most straight-forward. To many, interpreting the “days” of Genesis as vast ages is the simplest, easiest and best solution. At first glance, it seems brilliant and appears to resolve the conflict. Many people are bothered by the appearance that science and the Bible are at odds with each other and in constant battle. It’s uncomfortable to have to choose between the two. On one hand, if you choose “science”, you are left with a nagging feeling of guilt, that somehow you are rejecting God’s Word and that your faith is weak. On the other hand, if you choose the Bible, you feel that you are broadcasting to the world that you have no real intelligence and are going to cling to your blind faith in the Bible no matter what anyone says and no matter what science discovers. Both responses are unsatisfying. If there were just some way to resolve this tension, it would be welcomed with open arms. Unfortunately, most people’s “solutions” have come at the expense of fidelity to God’s Word, rather than to question or re-evaluate modern science.
When we are not careful in our biblical interpretation, we are in danger of taking a difficult situation and making it even worse. I believe that is what happens when we accept many of the current “compromise” positions. We actually end-up taking a fundamentally poor scientific theory (unbeknownst to many) and marrying it to (what then has become) bad theology. How could that possibly be a “good” solution?
Compromise
Compromise can be a great thing. If your children are arguing over which restaurant to eat at after church, a compromise might be in order. Today Lauren gets to choose and next week it’s
Tyler’s turn. It often works the same way in marriage…each partner may have to make slight compromises in what they desire in order to maintain harmony. What happens if we apply this principle to our apparent Bible/science dilemma?
You might ask, “Do we really want to compromise science?” I don’t really think that I would want my doctor compromising his procedures when diagnosing an illness or performing an operation. We certainly wouldn’t want NASA scientists knowingly compromising on acknowledged scientific principles when designing the space shuttle. At this point, it doesn’t seem logical to ask “science” to compromise, so our only other choice is to come-up with some sort of compromise related to Scripture. While this may not seem like an ideal option for many Christians, it appears more palatable to many than “messing with” science, which they feel inadequate and unqualified to do. Most importantly, many have convinced themselves that how we interpret the Bible doesn’t really matter anyway. They reason, “Who really cares how God created, as long as we at least agree that He is ultimately the creator of all?”
I would like to propose a solution that actually does not ask either science or the Bible to compromise. How in the world is that possible? It’s very possible when we understand three basic concepts.
(A)
There is a very important distinction between “operational science” and “historical science”.
(B)
There is a very important distinction between “science” and “scientist’s opinions”.
(C)
The Bible is the infallible Word of God.
Let me expand on these very briefly.
Point “(a)”. Operational science deals with things we can observe and test “in the present” and involves conducting repeated experiments that allow us to either confirm or refute our initial hypotheses. Producing faster computers, improving medical procedures and designing more energy efficient appliances are just a few examples of things that fall within the realm of “operational science.”
Historical science, on the other hand, deals with determining details about events that happened in the unobserved past. The whole notion of origins falls into this category. Not only were we not there to observe the “beginnings”, but we also cannot reproduce those events in the present. What we can do, is conduct experiments in the present and then using a number of assumptions about the past, formulate some logically-based ideas of what may have occurred. We are not talking about compromising “operational science”, but merely questioning some of the assumptions and conclusions within the realm of “historical science”.
That leads to point (b). As an example, it is “science” that “proves” there are fossils in various layers of the Earth, whereas how and when they got there is a matter of “scientists’ opinions”, which are tentative and subject to change with the discovery of additional data.
These conclusions were made by men and women, who were not there at the beginning, don’t know everything, sometimes make mistakes, sometimes are dishonest with their findings—driven by their own agendas—and who are ultimately studying a “fallen” world which is not the same as it was originally created. This holds true for Christians as well, so we should keep this in mind as we do our own “scientific research” regarding origins.
Lastly point (c), considering the limitations of science and the ultimate nature of God’s Word, we should give precedence to Scripture in any situation where unresolved conflict exists. Even though the Bible is God’s first attempt at writing a book, I think He did a pretty good job (just a little humor—no disrespect intended). He is fully capable of telling us exactly what He did without the notion of having to “dumb it down” for the alleged primitive culture of the patriarchs. I believe that God says what He means and means what He says. (Yes, there are passages in the Bible that are poetical and allegorical, but it is always evident by the context. Genesis 1 & 2 were written as historical literature, and thus, should be interpreted that way.) Since modern science is a relatively “new kid on the block”, it doesn’t make sense that it would be required to correctly understand such a fundamental concept as the origin of the life and the universe. It would mean that for most of history, the people of God were truly living in the “dark ages”, not understanding that God did not really mean exactly what He said and that it is only now that we are able to figure out that even though He said “six days”, He really meant billions of years and natural mechanisms. This doesn’t at all seem consistent with God’s character and doesn’t say much about His ability to communicate. He is not a God of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33).
So What Does A “Day” Really Mean?
Having covered a lot of background information up to this point, we will now delve into the question of what a “day” actually means.
Apart from there being a strong scientific case for a young Earth, let’s assume for the time being that the majority of modern scientists are correct about their conclusions regarding the age of the Earth. (For more information regarding the age of the Earth, see our booklet entitled “The Age of the Earth—Does It Even Matter?”)
Is it possible to fit these billions of years comfortably into the Bible without violating basic principles of interpretation? Does a proper rendering of Scripture actually call for long periods of time and an old Earth? This should actually be our first set of questions, as opposed to relying on science to put restrictions on the biblical account.
Countless people have uttered the phrase, “but the Bible says that a day is as a thousand years”. This is supposed to be strong support, if not absolute proof, that the days in Genesis 1 are not ordinary days.
I have had numerous people approach me and offer such statements in defense of their belief in an old Earth. I always ask them, “Where do you find that in the Bible?” The majority of these people respond by saying that they aren’t sure where it is, they just know it’s in there somewhere. I ask a follow-up question to see if they know who penned that passage and they invariably do not know that either. I ask a further question… “Do you know the context of that passage?” Again, they respond in the negative. (By the way, I always ask these questions in humility and respect, just wanting them to think through a few issues.) I then proceed to explain exactly where the passages are found, as well as who wrote them and detail the context of each passage, which we will do here as well.
The main passage to which they refer, is II Peter 3:8:
“But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.”
Peter is referencing Psalm 90:4 (“For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.”) He is urging them to recall something he assumes they already know (hence the phrase “but do not forget”). The psalmist does not say that a day is equal to a thousand years, he merely uses a simile in which two very different things are compared to each other. A thousand years is compared with something very different…an ordinary day. The fact the he also compares it to “a watch in the night” implies that the “watch in the night” is about equivalent to a “day”. If this passage truly is intending to convey the idea that a “day” really means a thousand years, then a “watch in the night” is also a thousand years, but no one is willing to reinterpret other passages that use that phrase as meaning thousands of years (ref. Psalm 63:6 & 119:148).
Furthermore, if a “day” really is a thousand years, then Jonah was in the great fish for 3,000 years, because the Old Testament states that his ordeal lasted “three days” (Jonah 1:17). Actually, it would have been more like 6,000 years, because it says “three days and three nights”. Nights must be about equal to days if we are to be consistent and logical, so we have 3,000 years for the “days” and another 3,000 for the “nights”. Jesus would also have been in the grave for 3 thousand years, because it says he rose after 3 “days”. This is obviously ludicrous, but it makes a point.
The actual context of the passage in II Peter 3 starts in verse 2 with the statement “that ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets”. He goes on to warn that in the “last days” skeptics would arise, doubting the return of Christ. They would boastfully state that even though we claim Christ is returning, in reality, he hasn’t come yet and he never will. Peter then responds by telling us that these “scoffers” (of which there are many today) are deliberately ignoring two things: (1) that by the word of God, the heavens and Earth were created and that (2) God judged the entire Earth with a global flood because of sin. In this context we find the following: what they wanted to see happen immediately (the return of Christ), God can take a thousand years in doing, and that what they think would take “thousands of years” (the creation of the world), God can do in a day! The whole point of the passage is that God is outside of time…not constrained by it in any way. He sees all time; past, present and future, simultaneously. This Greek passage has nothing to do with defining a Hebrew word in the Genesis creation narrative, written over a thousand years earlier.
It has been noted that the word for “day” in Genesis 1 can actually have multiple meanings. This is very true, just as the word “day” in English can have different meanings. Take for example the following sentence: “In my day, we had to get up early and work all day long, so we could save enough money to go on a 5-day vacation.” In this sentence, the word “day” is used 3 different ways. The first occurrence represents a general period of time, the second generally refers to the light portion of a day, and the final occurrence is in reference to an ordinary 24 hour, day/night cycle. The context determines the meaning in each case.
We have a similar situation with the use of “day” in Genesis. The original Hebrew word used is “yom” and it can have a few different meanings.
An ordinary solar day (~24 hours)
The light portion of an ordinary solar day
A general/vague period of time
A specific point in time
The period of one year
Although it can mean a general period of time, it never refers to a long period of time with a definite beginning and distinct, marked ending (such as the ending of one day and the distinct beginning of the next).
Is there anything in the immediate context of Genesis 1 that would assist us in determining the meaning in each case? We actually find a number of indicators.
The first time we see “yom”, it is defined for us quite simply “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.” (Genesis 1:5) If a “day is thousands of years (or more realistically millions or billions), then what is a “night”?
Association with a Number
Anytime we see the word “yom” (day) outside of Genesis 1 associated with a number (e.g. the fifth day, day 12, etc.) it always refers to an ordinary day. That is exactly what we have in Genesis 1 (e.g. “And the evening and the morning were the first day.”, “And the evening and the morning were the second day.”) If it is a normal day everywhere else in the Old Testament, what is the textual basis for interpreting it differently in Genesis 1?
Anytime we see the word “yom” (day) outside of Genesis 1 associated with the word “evening” or “morning” or the phrase “evening and morning” it always refers to an ordinary day. Again, that is exactly what we find in Genesis 1 (“And the evening and the morning were the first day.”, “And the evening and the morning were the second day.”, etc.)
Referring to the sun and stars, God said “let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years.” (Genesis 1:14) If a “day” really means multiplied millions of years, what does a “year” mean? This verse would then be interpreted to read something like the following: “let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for millions of years, and years.”
The plural form of “day” (“days”) in Hebrew is “yamim”. In each of the 700+ occurrence of this word in the Old Testament, it is rendered “days” in the ordinary sense of a solar day.
A key passage related to the plural use is Exodus 20:11 (part of the 10 Commandments): “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
This is the whole basis for our work week and Sabbath rest. If these “days” were actually millions of years, our work week and Sabbath rest make no sense. Are we supposed to work for six periods of millions and millions of years and then rest for a period of millions of years? (Most of us wouldn’t mind the resting part!)
What Does God Tell Us He Did?
I don’t know anyone who would try to argue that an all-powerful God is limited in His ability to create whatever He wishes, however He wishes and whenever He wishes. God could just as easily have created an entire universe in a trillionth of a second as He could over a period of trillions of years. That is certainly not the issue. The question becomes more of “what did He tell us He did?”
It is interesting to note that if God had meant to convey the idea that He created everything over vast periods of time, there are a number of Hebrew words He could have used. A partial list follows:
Qedem “ancient” or “of old”
Olam “everlasting”, “eternity”, “of old” or “for ever”
Dor “a revolution of time” or “an age”
Tamid “continually” or “for ever”
Ad “unlimited time” or “for ever”
Netsach “for ever”
Eth general term for time
On the other hand, if He meant to convey the idea of ordinary solar days, there is only one word He could have used…“yom” which is exactly what He did choose.
In concluding this segment on what the Hebrew text actually means, it is insightful to read the words of Old Testament scholar James Barr (
Oxford
University):
“Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience; . . . Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the “days” of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know.” [James Barr, Oriel Professor of the interpretation of the Holy Scripture, Oxford University, England, in a letter to David C.C. Watson, 23 April 1984]
Man’s Place in this World
Let’s briefly consider our own place in the world, as taught by currently accepted theories. We are told that mankind began evolving somewhere between 3 and 4 million years ago (from ape-like creatures). Modern man is supposed to have appeared somewhere around 200,000 years ago. Even though this seems like a long time ago (and indeed it would be), it would actually be considered to be at the very “end” of the overall timeline, considering that the universe supposedly originated closer to 14 billion years ago. Let’s say you told your child that you were leaving for church in an hour, but you wanted them to make their bed right away. If they waited until one minute before it was time to go, would you say that they obeyed, or would you say that they put it off until the very end?
To put this into perspective, if all of history (supposedly 14 billion years) was compressed into one hour with the “Big Bang” having occurred at the very beginning of the hour (starting it all off), mankind doesn’t arrive on the scene until there is about 5/100 of a second left in the entire hour! That truly would be considered “at the end”. (Semi-technical: Alright, some of you are wondering where we come-up with those figures. If we take the estimate for the “age of modern man”—200,000 years, and divide it by the estimated age of the universe—14 billion years, we come-up with 0.00143%. There are 3,600 seconds in an hour, so we take 0.00143% of 3,600 and end-up with approximately 0.05 seconds…that’s how long before the end that man would arrive in our compressed 1-hour scenario.)
Does the Bible comment at all about the timing of Adam’s arrival? It certainly does and with no less than the words of Jesus Himself (who is the creator of all things—see John 1, Colossians 1, Hebrews 1). In Mark 10:6 (and also Matthew 19:4) we find Jesus in the middle of a conversation with the Pharisees, in which they are trying to trap Him with difficult questions. In this case, it is in regard to divorce and remarriage. In His response to the Pharisees Jesus states: “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.” The Greek phrase here is very emphatic that “male and female” (Adam and Eve) were created at the beginning of creation. This is in stark contrast to what we are taught from anthropology and secular geology. However, if the days in Genesis are ordinary days, then this makes perfect sense, having Adam and Eve created only 5 days after the creation of the universe itself (day 6), all within the first week of the entire history of the world! That truly would be “the beginning” as opposed to the standard Big Bang scenario.
An additional problem we have when trying to harmonize the Genesis account with millions or billions of years is that the order of events becomes a significant conundrum. Consider the following examples.
According to the big bang (and associated “billions of years”), the sun evolved first and then the Earth much later. The Bible, however, tells us that God created the Earth first (on day 1), and the sun later (on day 4).
According to the standard billions of years view, the Earth initially cooled down from a molten mass into hard rock. Then millions of years later, water appeared. Genesis teaches that the Earth was initially covered with water and that the dry land did not appear until day 3.
Billions of years tells us that we first had fish, then land plants. Genesis says that God created plants first (day 3) then fish (day 5).
Billions of years tells us that reptiles appeared first and millions of years later evolved into birds. Genesis says that God created the birds of the air first (day 5) then reptiles (day 6).
These are just a few examples of contradictory order of events that exist when we attempt to harmonize the standard secular model (with its millions of years) into Scripture.
We are all fairly familiar with the story of Noah’s ark and the flood. Tampering with the Genesis creation account also affects this text. According to the currently accepted geologic history of the Earth, the mountains, valleys, ocean trenches and various other geologic features were all formed over multiplied millions of years. The problem here is that if this is true, by the time we get to the story of Noah, the Earth is largely in its current form…
Mt.
Everest is there, the Grand Canyon, the
Rockies, etc. This leaves no room for a truly global flood as described in Genesis 6-9 (which would catastrophically demolish these features, thus removing the evidence of millions of years). Because of this, most people who view the days in Genesis as being vast ages, also view Noah’s flood as just a local flood, limited to the
Mesopotamian
Valley (where Noah was living).
This is not at all what the text indicates. Consider the following passage from Genesis 7:19-23:
“And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.”
This was truly a global event!
If it was just a local flood, why did God have Noah spend so much time building an ark (possibly over 100 years)? He could simply have said, “Hey Noah, here’s a phone number of a good realtor…I want you to move, because I’m going to flood this whole area!”
Also, why build such a big ark…over 1.5 million cubic feet of storage? If it was a local flood, he would have only had to include the local animals. And why take birds on the ark? They could easily have flown (migrated) to other areas.
And what about God’s promise that He would never send that kind of flood again (Genesis 9:15-16)? If it was a local flood, then He lied, because there have been numerous devastating local floods throughout history.
The only scenario that makes sense in light of the text (and true geological science) is that this was a global flood, which is consistent with a 6 solar day creation account, but directly opposed to the compromise of millions of years.
Death
One of the biggest issues with interpreting the days of Genesis as anything other than solar days has to do with the entrance of death into our world.
According to secular models of Earth history, the layers that we observe were laid down over multiplied millions of years, long before the appearance of man. The problem occurs when we see that these layers contain billions of fossils. Fossils are largely the remains of creatures that were once living. This would mean that death (and disease, blood-shed, mutations, survival of the fittest, etc.) existed for millions of years before Adam and Eve were even created. The Bible clearly states that it was Adam’s sin that brought death into God’s world (Romans 5:12). We even have evidence of cancer in dinosaur bones. God pronounced His original creation as “very good”, not filled with death and disease. It was man’s disobedience that tainted God’s creation and brought the curse upon mankind (and all of creation—Genesis 3:14-19, Romans 8:22).
If death existed for millions of years before Adam, then we are not responsible for death (and its associated curse) and therefore, Jesus wasted His time dying for us.
While it’s certainly true that one’s eternal destiny is not dependent upon their view on the age of the Earth, it does affect the way we view the authority of Scripture and also the way we share our faith. I believe there are two crucial elements necessary for understanding God’s truths: (1) His Word—the Bible and (2) the Holy Spirit. We don’t want to fall into the trap of feeling woefully incapable of understanding His Word because of a lack of academic credentials (i.e. not having a PhD in astrophysics, microbiology, geology or even Greek and Hebrew). God is perfectly capable of communicating to us through the Scriptures with the aid of the Holy Spirit. When we have to rely on “experts” telling us that certain passages mean something other than what they appear to say, we are often on dangerous ground. This is not to say that we have never had our understanding of God’s Word enhanced by those who hold such degrees, but it should always be accompanied by a spirit of humility, graciousness and in consistency with the rest of the Bible.
We also have to keep in mind that for the vast majority of history, we did not have “modern science”. If it is only now, through these new so-called “discoveries” that we can finally understand that God didn’t really mean 6 days and a global flood, but rather a Big Bang, 14 billion years, a local flood, death before sin, etc., then all of those who have come before us, were truly living in the “dark ages”.
It also puts God in the position of thinking something along the lines of “I know I said 6 days and global flood…and they actually believed me, but when they finally get around to developing more advanced science, they will realize that I never meant them to take it seriously. I just hope that they aren’t too upset when they find out how wrong they were when they took me at my word.”
We need to trust the authority of God’s Word and be a bit less concerned about the “wisdom of man” which is foolishness to God and God’s “foolishness” is wiser than man (I Corinthians 1:25 & 3:19).
Perspective: The Gospel Message
As interesting or important as this topic might be, there is something infinitely more significant and it relates to your eternal destiny.
Although I could never prove this, I think it’s a safe bet that when your life is over and you find yourself standing (more likely kneeling) before God, He will not be quizzing you on the length of days in the Genesis creation account! At that point, there will only be one subject on the table and I wish to briefly address it in closing this booklet.
The Bible clearly teaches the following:
God created everything, including mankind.
“For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth…all things were created by him and for him.”—Colossians 1:16
See also Genesis 1:27, John 1:3
Man rebelled against God and was consequently spiritually separated from him. This sin brought a curse, including death to all of God’s creation.
“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.”—Romans 5:12
God’s standard is 100% holiness, because he is 100% holy. However, we are not able to be “good enough” to obtain this standard, no matter how hard we try.
“Be ye holy; for I am holy.”—1 Peter 1:16
“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.”—Romans 3:20
See also James 2:10, Isaiah 64:6
The penalty for our sin is death, but God has paid the price for us (for those who fully trust in Christ).
“For the wages [consequence] of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”—Romans 6:23
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”—John 3:16
See also Romans 5:8
Contrary to popular belief, there are not “many ways” to God.
“Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me’.”—John 14:6
Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”—Acts 4:12
Restoring your relationship with God comes not from “head knowledge” or simply acknowledging the historical existence of Jesus, but as a result of repenting from your sins, and placing your faith completely in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (as payment for your sins). A fair amount of head knowledge and “good works” will naturally follow if you are sincere in your commitment to Christ, but they are not the basis of your salvation.
Here’s the personal challenge…before the day is over, ask yourself this question:
If I were to die tonight and find myself standing before God, and he asked “Why should I let you into heaven?” what would my response be?
Is there any rational reason that today, you would not confess your sins and place your faith in Jesus Christ alone for the forgiveness of your sins and assurance of your eternal salvation?
“I tell you, now is the time of God’s favor, now is the day of salvation.”—2 Corinthians 6:2
Don’t put it off another day…
“And I’ll say to myself, ‘You have plenty of good things laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.’ But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’ This is how it will be with anyone who stores up things for himself but is not rich toward God.”—Luke 12:19-21
You may be sensing that you don’t know for sure what would happen to you if you were to die today and that you truly need to commit your life to Christ, but aren’t quite sure “how” to do it. It’s not by saying some magical phrase and doing something highly mystical, but simply by honestly and sincerely saying something like following:
“Dear God, I know that you created me and that I have not lived according to your standards. Your word tells me that “trying to be good enough” does not earn your favor. Because of your great love for me, you sent your son (Jesus) to die on a cross to pay the penalty for my own sins, so that I don’t have to spend eternity separated from you in judgment. I am asking today for you to forgive my sins and am accepting the free gift of eternal life that you are offering to me, through your son Jesus Christ. I want to live my life in a way that is honoring and pleasing to you. When I do sin in the future, help me to confess those sins and thank you for the fact that they too are also forgiven in Jesus. Amen!”
If you sincerely pray a prayer similar to the one above, you can have peace, knowing where you will spend eternity! It doesn’t mean that everything else in your life will be easy, but that you can have confidence in your own eternal destiny (and you have a new-found relationship with the creator of the universe who cares for you!). Now isn’t that just a bit more exciting than learning about how long a “day” is?
“I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”—John 5:24
“I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.”—John 10:28-29
“Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you.”—1 Peter 5:7
“I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”—Philippians 4:13 (NKJV)
Feel free to contact us if you have any questions about trusting in Christ, the Bible or Christianity in general: info@CECwisc.com
