Before beginning with the study of the specific days of creation, we should take a look at another theory which has be propounded. It is called the Day-Age Theory.
This theory, which has been supported by many sincere and competent Biblical scholars, states that the days of creation, which are stated in the Bible are actually ages of evolutionary geology. One problem with this theory is that the creationary steps outlined in Genesis 1 are very different from the accepted order of fossils in the rocks representing the geological ages. One of the explanations for this would be the effect of the Flood.
A second problem with this theory is the same as that stated in our discussion of the Gap Theory. It relies on fossil records that are the result of death, which did not exist before the fall of man.
One of the cautions that all students of the Bible must take into consideration when doing this type of in-depth study, is to acknowledge all such theories and interpretations, but then settle back on what the Holy Spirit has revealed. And the only way we can know that we are hearing the Holy Spirit, is to compare what we hear with the Bible, for the Bible is the standard. The more accustomed we become to dismissing portions of God's Word, the easier it becomes to dismiss basic Christian fundamentals, including Jesus Christ, and thus we render the Bible useless. Sometimes we just have to go on faith, and trust the Lord to reveal the answers to us when the time is appropriate.
To many of us, such a statement might sound like a cop-out, but it really isn't. What we are talking about is a combination of reason and inspiration coupled within and without the Bible. First we must remember that the Bible was not written as a science book but as an inspirational teaching that we would seek and follow God. Nevertheless, God did give us the laws of science during the creation of the heavens and the earth. So, we must ask ourselves, is there a way to harmonize scientific evidence with the Bible? I believe there is.
We have all seen a cartoon drawing of an object in flight, and the way the artist simulates flight by drawing a series of lines behind the object. It's not really moving, it just looks like it is. Now suppose that the drawing "came to life" and that the object was at the midpoint of its flight, and the object continued from where the drawing began. If we timed the flight from the three-quarter-point to the end, we would come to the conclusion that the object was in flight four times longer than we had timed it. We would be wrong, of course, for the object was only in actual flight for twice the time. The other time was only depicted in the drawing.
Since we really don't know all the aspects of how God created the heavens and the earth, we could logically accept the premise that God was like the cartoon artist. God set things in motion in His planning stage, just as the artist's drawing. Then when God spoke creation into existence, it began to move. If such a case were true, the timing that science has indicated would be off by whatever "design" factor existed before the actual motion began.
Let's also consider a mighty oak tree that is one-hundred years old. Near the base of its trunk it has a hundred rings. There is nothing to say that God couldn't have created this tree as described. If we cut it down and counted its rings we would conclude that it's one-hundred years old, when in fact it's only just been created.
We do not have to force to Bible to comply with scientific evidence, nor do we have to deny the scientific evidence, for both the Bible and the scientific evidence could be correct. It only depends upon our vantage point when we observe the evidence. We particularly need to keep these concepts in mind as we continue on in our study of creation.