A Matter of Days: Resolving a Creation Controversy (Paperback)

~ (Author) "TWO PASSIONS MOTIVATE THE WRITING OF THIS BOOK: THE STUDY OF GOD'S Word (the Bible) and the study of His creation (science)..." (more)
Key Phrases: creationist leaders, fourth creation day, long creation days, Jesus Christ, Oort Cloud, Kuiper Belt (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description

An old-earth view takes on the challenges of young-earth proponents through a study of history, Scripture, and nature-and a testable creation model.

About the Author

HUGH ROSS, founder and president of Reasons To Believe, has written many books, including, The Creator and the Cosmos, Beyond the Cosmos, The Genesis Question, and Origins of Life (coauthored with Dr. Fazale Rana). Dr. Ross is a favorite speaker at college campuses, churches, and business firms. He has also appeared on The History Channel, the 700 Club, The John Ankerberg Show, Coast to Coast AM, and Focus on the Family. Dr. Ross lives in southern California with his wife, Kathy, and two sons.

Product Details

• Paperback: 303 pages
• Publisher: NavPress Publishing Group; 1st edition (June 1, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1576833755
• ISBN-13: 978-1576833759
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 5.8 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 2.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (61 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #44,159 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in this category: (What's this?)

  #53 in

  Books > Religion & Spirituality > Religious Studies > Science & Religion

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

134 of 155 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars An outsider's view, February 11, 2005

By	Royce E. Buehler "figvine" (Cambridge, MA USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This book ended up mysteriously on the desk of a colleague of mine, an X-ray astronomer. Knowing that I was a Christian - though scarcely any of the reviewers here would agree with that assessment, since I have no doubt that Darwin was right, a criterion that seems to matter more these days than relying on the blood of Christ for salvation - he passed it along to me.

Ross didn't change my mind about anything. He has a good grasp of astronomy, and explains it pretty well, but I would suggest he's out of his depth in those rare passages when he argues directly against evolution. I'm not his intended audience, obviously. He wants to speak to those who adhere to young-earth creationism, or to those who are wavering in their faith because they have been told you that you can't be a Christian and also believe the universe is more than a few thousand years old.

Nevertheless, he won me over. This is someone I would be proud to worship with: he approaches his subject, and his adversaries (be they secular or young-earth creationists) with civility, "gentleness, meekness, self-control". Attributes not uncommon in my experience among biblical inerrantists, but rarely on display from any side when creationism is the topic.

Ross's central concern is what the Bible has to say about creation. Of his 23 chapters, only four deal with the astronomical evidence for an old universe. One of those, and a couple of others, deal with arguments for intelligent design drawn from astronomy (and as one who's delved deeply into both astronomy and biology, I think those are the most solid ID arguments at the moment.) Most, however, deal with general issues of biblical interpretation, and with the biblical evidence for an old universe. This is a man who is serious about placing his trust in the Bible.

That the book displays the fruits of the Spirit is the most important reason for my 4 stars. But it also displays considerable freshness of insight. Since I take all of Genesis 1 to be metaphorical, I have no dog in the "day-age/ 24 hour day" fight. It seems to me both sides have pretty good knock-'em-down prooftexts, which would lead to a draw if it weren't for the fact that a certain spirit of conformity in the church makes people prefer to go with the crowd rather than to play Berean and dig deep. But Ross offers a raft of biblical arguments for day-age that I hadn't seen before, as well as new links between 20th century cosmology and the language of the Bible. (For example, the passage about God "stretching the heavens like a tent" has been a trifle embarrassing to biblical literalists, since it seems to suggest the stars and planets sit in a two-dimensional sheet over the earth. But as Ross points out, something very like this is an analogy frequently used to explain the Big Bang: the 3-dimensional universe expands as the surface of a 4-dimensional sphere, and students are often encouraged to picture a stretching 2-dimensional sheet as a guide to understanding the theory.)

Ross's chief motivation - other than a respect for truth, and a desire to set forth the truth as he understands it - is evangelical. Many millions of people, having been exposed to and convinced by the overwhelming physical evidence for the great age of the universe, will think of Christianity as just a pack of irrelevant nonsense, if they are told that one must reject essentially all of science in order to accept Christ. There is an offense of the Cross - but this isn't it. If the day-age interpretation of Genesis is correct, then rather than the offence of the Cross, this is just a fence around the Cross, placed there by Christians too stubborn to distinguish tithes and cummin from "the weightier things of the law"; and Ross fears its effect will be to keep sinners from crossing over into life. ("Too stubborn" is my phrasing; I think Ross would find a kinder way to say it.)

In my own judgment, the insistence on discarding the theory of evolution is another such fence. Most of those who can't get past the "six literal days" fence won't be able to get past that one either. But many may; and this makes Ross's contribution a valuable one.

One final word of my own. Those who insist that the Bible "plainly" speaks of 24-hour days in Genesis (and for that matter, those who insist that it "plainly" speaks of age-long days, or that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are "plainly" to be taken as literal history) are not merely reading what's in front of them. They are accepting what other men have told them about how the Bible "must" be read. Whenever you hear someone say: "God said it, I believe it, that settles it," what they are actually saying is, "I say God said it, I believe it, and I say that settles it." It may masquerade as humility before "God's word", but it is more often pride, or a fearful conformity to churchified traditions of men.

Everyone who picks up the Bible and reads is placing an interpretation on what he sees. The only protection against mistaking one's own, or one's congregation's, ideas for "what God says" is prayerful humility before God, and a loving openness to what fellow Christians everywhere find when they look in His word, and when they look into the new hearts He has given them. That's what I found in this book, and that's why I can heartily recommend it to creationists of all stripes.

47 of 55 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Matter of Days, July 8, 2004

By	Frank Taylor (Spokane) - See all my reviews

"A Matter of Days" could also be titled, "A Matter of Interpretation" because this is what this book is really about-a matter of which interpretation of the biblical and natural record is the correct one. The hub of the controversy involves the meaning of a creation 'day' as noted in Genesis. Young earth leaders claim that each creation day was strictly a 24-hour period. Do their claims have solid proof- or does the data point to the days of creation to be long epochs? Utilizing historical, biblical, theological and scientific data, the author Dr. Hugh Ross helps the reader answer this question. Surrounding the 'hub' of the controversy are lightening strike subjects like, "Doesn't belief in an old earth equate a belief in evolution?", "Was there any kind of death before the fall of Adam?", "Does the Bible speak of a "big bang" of creation?" and "Is God's plan a restored paradise (like Eden) or a whole brand new creation?" Mindful of people's feelings about each of these subjects, the author masterfully and humbly leads the reader to logical conclusions.
I would say that the last chapter really shows how fair Dr. Ross is willing to be with such a controversial subject of 'Old Earth vs. Young Earth'. He recommends that the church and the world outside evaluate the different creation models in an objective, easy to apply and understandable way. He notes that effective models help explain how and why particular phenomenon arises and that they are capable of predicting future discoveries and anticipating breakthroughs. With this in mind, the author provides two sample, non-exhaustive models of the Young Earth view and Old Earth view respectively. This provides the reader an objective way to analyze, over time, which model best represent reality. This book is like a breath of fresh 'common sense' to anyone who has been touched in some way by the controversy. I highly recommend that you read it.

55 of 66 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Finally!, June 27, 2004

By	Mark Ritter (Murrieta, CA USA) - See all my reviews

The latest book by Dr. Ross treats the age of the earth controversy in a way most of us cannot - with repect and charity. But this book doesn't just tell us why the old earth view is more plausible from a scientific standpoint, although it does that well. Dr. Ross does several things unique to the whole controversy.
He not only uses science to support his interpretation of Genesis, he uses the Bible itself. He takes us out of Genesis One (a stronghold for those of young earth persuasion) and into other creation accounts in the Bible showing that they too support an old earth interpretation. And he is not bound by the English translation, but goes right to the Hebrew translations of eminent world-class Hebrew scholars.
He also does the correct thing at the end of the book by laying out predictions. If the young earth interpretation of Genesis is correct, then there are many things that will be revealed in the coming years (e.g. there will be fewer and fewer scientists accepting the big bang model, or, more actual scientific evidence will support a thousand-of-years-old universe). On the other hand if the universe is old, more and more evidence will be revealed to support that (e.g. radiometric dating will prove more accurate and reliable, the big bang model will stand up even stronger under new evidence, etc.)
Here is my prediction: The dyed-in-the-wool young earth creationists will not read it, but they will reject it as heretical, never the less. Many people who are undecided will read it and because of the beautiful logic, ease of reading, and Dr Ross' general tone of reconciliation and harmony and his uncompromising love for God, will be convinced that both the Bible and what we see around us in nature are from the same One.