I suggest you get a copy of my book “Is There a God?”  It is available at www.ipibooks.com   I go into great detail on the days of creation.

Genesis 1 is not intended to be a scientific treatise on the events of creation.  It is a spiritual polemic against the pagan religions of ancient Sumerian and Babylon.  Trying to analyze this spiritual polemic from a scientific perspective may not be the best approach, given the nature of Near Eastern literature in general, and this particular passage in particular.

Nevertheless, the general outline of Genesis 1 is in broad agreement with what we know from science.  To illustrate this, consider this scenario.  Do they have day and night on Venus?  Answer: Yes.  How often does one see the sun, moon and stars on Venus?  Never, because the cloud cover is too thick.  Scientists believe that the ancient earth had a much higher concentration of such substances as methane, carbon dioxide, ammonia and water than it does today.  It is highly likely that on the early earth, there was a very thick cloud cover, so that, from the surface, the heavenly objects which were producing night and day were never visible.

But then live appeared (created by God, of course), and the earliest very simple life forms began to chemically change the earth’s atmosphere.  Bacterian began to produce large quantities of oxygen and nitrogen, and to literally “eat” the methane and ammonia (something bacteria continue to do today).  So, by the fourth “day” the heavenly objects, which had been producing night and day from the beginning of the earth, finally became visible.

By this means, I believe the apparent contradiction is removed.  Is this a correct view of the case, or are we trying too hard to make Genesis 1 “scientific?”  I am not sure.  Many use what is called the framework model, which divides the days into 1-2-3   then  4-5-6.  They note parallels between days 1 and 4, between days 2 and 5 and between 3 and 6, and explain the seeming chronological order this way.  I am not sure what is the correct view, although I tend to lean toward the day-age theory, and use the explanation in the previous paragraphs.  What I can say is that the Bible is inspired by God, and, properly understood, there are no contradictions in the Bible.  That is my considered belief based on having solved literally hundreds of supposed contradictions which turned out to not be contradictions.

I do not believe that the concept of evolution is in any way contradictory to the biblical account.  The Bible gives God full credit for creating life and for creating all species, but does not specify the means by which God did these things.  I believe that God created life, and that God has directed the path of evolution, but I believe that God has also used natural evolution as part of the process by which life has changed over time.  There is not contradiction between evolution, properly understood, and the Genesis creation account, also properly understood.

No, do not stuff your doubts away. My suggestion: keep track of these doubts.  In fact, actually write them down.  Over time, the list might lengthen a bit, but as you study the Bible and seek rational answers to your doubts, you will find your list eventually getting shorter and shorter, to the point that you will become more and more convinced that the Bible is the perfect, fully inspired Word of God.  That has been my experience, and I am sure it will be yours.

BTW, if you look at the Q & A section of my web site, you will find literally hundreds of supposed contradictions in the Bible given perfectly reasonable answers.  This might be helpful.  No, do not stuff your doubts under the rug, as they say.  Hold on to them, and find answers to them (which is exactly what you are doing now!)

John Oakes