Study Bibles and a Literal Six-Day Creation Narrative
(Part One)
If you are an avid Bible reader then you know doubt have purchased or seen personally something called a Study Bible. They come multiple fonts, sizes, English translations, and theological viewpoints. It is this last comment that is our focus of attention for this article.
We should not be naive in believing that Study Bible are unbiased in their note presentations. Don't forget the notes are not scripture they are simply notes to help the reader better understand the meaning of the text (or at least to make sure the reader understands it the way the note writer wants them to).
Some study Bible dig deep and others are rather shallow. Some provide actual exegetical comments from syntax and grammar for actually defending a literal six-day creation week. On the other hand, others go to great length to defend nearly every other possible interpretation of the text.
I am including a sampling of the notes from some well-known study Bibles so you the reader can see first hand the position taught and encouraged by each. Please make careful note as to what each study Bible teaches (positively) and teaches against (negatively). The danger enters when they simply start espousing other (acceptable positions) held by other new evangelical pastors and teachers.
Our first stop will be the The MacArthur Study Bible, authored and general editor being John MacArthur. His study notes on Gen 1:1-2:3 are as follows:
"This description of God creating heaven and earth is understood to be: 1) recent, i.e., thousands not millions of years ago; 2) ex nihilo, i.e., out of nothing; and 3) special, i.e., in 6 consecutive 24 hour periods called "days" and further distinguished as such by this phrase, "the evening and the morning." Scripture does not support a creation date earlier than about 10,000 years ago."'
Obviously The MacArthur Study Bible is a strong advocate for a young earth creationist position. He clearly is not endorsing any possible form of day age, theistic evolution, or a gap theory. And certainly not a multi-million year old earth.
Our next stop will be the Zondervan King James Study Bible, general editing done by Kenneth Barker. Associate editors were Burdick, Stek, Wessel, and Youngblood. Concerning 1:1 they write, "The opening verse is a summary statement introducing the six days of creation." Later in the notes for 1:5 they include, "Some say that the creation days were literal 24-hour days, others that they were indefinite periods. Several factors, however, support the first interpretation."
It is only academically honest to say the do fill nearly three inches worth of note space for providing a defense for literal 24-hour days. These notes do include pointing out problems with other understandings of the text.
Thirdly, we shall visit a newly published The Reformation Heritage KJV Study Bible, general editor Joel Beeke. Other editors were Barrett, Bilkes and Smalley. Concerning 1:1 they write, "The beginning of time, space, and matter. All cam from Him and is under His control." Later on 1:2 they state, "What the original creation was at the beginning, not what it became. The gap theory tries to argue original creation became corrupt, but the expression means empty and uninhabited."
So clearly they do not believe in any form of theistic evolution and take creation as six-literal days. They also directly disagree with and refute a gap theory position. Directly after Genesis one they include a full page article on creation which was adapted from John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. Later in an appendix they include a full length rendering of the Westminster Confession of Faith, which clearly stands on a literal six day, 24-hour creation week.
Fourth, we shall visit the time-tested Ryrie Study Bible, General Editor Charles Ryrie. His introductory notes include a roughly 6500 years old timeline. He writes against the gap theory, "Some understand a "gap" of an indeterminate period of time between verses 1 and 2, and translate "became' rather than "was." He includes a lengthy paragraph showing the problems with this gap period position. Later arguing against those seeing large period of time he writes, "Evening and morning cannot be construed to mean an age, but only a day; everywhere in the Pentateuch the word day, when used (as here) with a numerical adjective, means a solar day (now calibrated as 24 hours)."
Our next post shall include comments from the following Study Bibles:
The ESV Study Bible General Editor Wayne Grudem
The Reformation Study Bible, General Editor R. C. Sproul
The Apologetics Study Bible, Numerous Authors
The Archaeological Study Bible, General Editor Walter Kaiser Jr.
Hope this helps some. Comments Encouraged.
