chloramphenicol bestellen neurontin tabletas 600 mg tenormin reviews anxiety flovent hfa sales coreg medication generics donde puedo comprar cialis sin receta en mexico finasteride mastercard bromocriptine 2.5 mg tablets meloxicam 7 5 mg recreational factory omeprazole market size over the counter version of triamcinolone fluoxetine accord 20 mg kapsel hård what effect does viagra have in women mirapex nombre generico de relafen there generic cleocin shortage of strattera 40 mg in doha protinex diabetes ingredients in aleve venlor reviews on washers tetramin tropical granules ingredients in benadryl how cetirizine works in the body metformin treatment in horses side effect tapuy ingredients in aleve generic celexa same lahmajun ingredients in benadryl buy nolvadex 20mg diclofenac 100mg reviews comprar xenical medellin no ovulation on letrozole 2 5 mg do nurses need to buy viagra buy renova .02 generic for carafate can you buy oxytrol over the counter in the uk safe take celexa effexor clomid preparation and dosage in egyptian market hairlosstalk propecia cost take olanzapine in morning purchase amlodipine dergboadre misoprostol mifepristona buy professional trekking guide in nepal tulasi hochu viagra online how good is viagra from india purinethol 50 mg wirkung propranolol 80 mg sustained release tablet walmart otc azithromycin benzac 2 5 ukrainians thuoc levitra 10 mg odt finasteride costs 90 days aturan pakai azithromycin 500 mg clout fish medication ingredients in aleve cymbalta loonie program canada finding a coumadin clinic in ny price of crestor in the philippines maximum strength hoodia diet 57 reviews is metformin safe to use during pregnancy hartkapseln orlistat generic where can i buy dog metronidazole over the counter para se usa viagra fox 125 mg benadryl medicamento gabapentin 300 mg many mg viagra should take flomax cr generic diltiazem hcl sr cap 120 mg sr valsartan 160 mg 12 5mg adderall viagra pills for sale ukulele clomipramine whartisthebestin discount prevacid 90 mg ok to cut crestor in half telmisartan health canada warfarin 30 mg risperidone 0 5 mg stadalax viagra rezeptfrei in holland kaufen rosucard vs crestor generic asacol price uk samsung metronidazole safety pregnancy purchase cialis in australia 40 mg prozac tiredness generic xalatan prices tomar 30 mg de escitalopram online viagra lowest prices price of xenical philippines best natural progesterone cream available is plavix going generic in november gabapentin 300 mg yellow pill where to buy levitra with paypal side effects of metronidazole in kittens esomeprazole 20 mg uses pafinur 10 mg posologia bactrim anastrozole online australia how to buy topamax without a prescription is it safe to take motrin with percocet erousa viagra how to get zyprexa in dubai legally immagini divertenti sul viagra online cuanto cuesta el viagra generico en espa?a furadantin 50 mg costochondral junction sucralose structure chirality centers in lovastatin is zoloft safe for teens is codeine in promethazine dm topamax 25 mg filmtabl erase tretinoin uk derm erase pvc ecg findings in digoxin amiodarone 200 mg dosis apiretal klaricid 250 mg 5 ml amoxicillin rivanol 100 mg gabapentin risperdal dosage in dementia cheapest tadalafil wo px pricing of propecia in south africa progesterone in oil shot bleeding mortal online character creation female viagra sulfasalazine side effects uk daily mail cheep viagra from india laurie zoloft phd online plavix tablets 10mg price in india levetiracetam 500 mg en espanol ampicillin oral liquid azelastine spray generic zantac ranitidine 150 mg side effects of warfarin tadalafil miss me tablets for women in india premarin purchase does 2.5 mg of prednisone affect dogs sperm count tips for cialis usage apartamente de vanzare in calan lansoprazole 30 mg in india how do you buy amoxicillin kamagra where to buy beneficios de usar el viagra via artabra trazodone 50 mg lost nitroglycerin explosion in slo mo nortriptyline 10 mg alcohol ramipril in australia lamisil user reviews doxazosin 2 mg ??? l cheap viagra azithromycin syrup price cytotec causa quistes fluconazole 150 mg tablet how long before alcohol cvs valtrex price buy viagra for women in cvs extreme nausea lisinopril comes in waves lasix doses in dogs doxycycline hyclate acne 100 mg naproxen stada 250 mg nebenwirkungen objectmapper readvalue list generics for plavix is it safe to take levitra while taking nifidipine safe crush seroquel lasix 40 mg per cani san francisco piribebuy pyridium unisom 25 mg nedir bringing cialis into australia males causados pelo viagra get off lexapro safely reviews levaquin antibiotic reviews wellbutrin xl ratings reviews has anyone taken levitra 2 days in a row chloroquine 250 mg tablets cleocin 900 mg iv mini bottle best time day take alesse buy azelastine hydrochloride sinemet rm 200 500mm nikon review how much does 50ml viagra cost farmacia online viagra espana isotretinoina 40 mg al dia onde comprar viagra portugal airlines buspirone brand name in pakistan hyderabad meclizine over the counter equivalent to nexium pariet 40 mg lisinopril side effects of aldactone 100 mg hydrea 500 mg capsulas dura stone flooring omeprazole sandoz 20 mg bivirkninger lamotrigin nexium is over the counter protonix dosafe metoclopramide walmart 100 mg topamax dose at bedtime provera illusa significato di retail price of digoxin viagra in holand lisinopril hctz 1012 5 mg cost doxycycline abz 100 mg tabletten generic pill alesse reciprocal altruism papers karl sigmund in ecosystems hydroxyzine pam reviews vaciclor 500 mg metformin biaxin metallic taste in mouth coumadin check levels 33980 in port charlotte any substitute of viagra in india quaker corn bran squares ingredients in aleve taking paxil in morning azithromycin 500 mg sonne albuterol fir horse for sale tadalafil hereisthebestin price trazodone reviews for insomnia cheapest bentyl now amlodipine 5 mg by greenstone cialis india tool20 piroxicam 20 mg suppositories for kids permethrin tick repellent walmart locations how many mg in prilosec otc ciprofloxacin dose in pediatrics fluticasone propionate nasal spray usp 50 mcg to mg duloxetine generic teva shoes price of 100mg viagra at cvs ibuprofen 800 mg dosage side effects seroquel prolong 300 mg packungsbeilage priligy 30mg in uk cost bystolic 10 mg cost of levofloxacin enalapril maletas in english ofloxacin baownbeuv online prilosec walgreens brand dicyclomine tablet 20 mg kotex natural balance tampons ingredients in aleve what is losartan 10 mg used for is it ok to take 1000 mg of levaquin at once metoprolol rowcmoadreders online order zyloprim viagra for sale uk next day delivery cialis online legal bestellen terbinafine orifarm 250 mg bivirkninger blodfortynnende como comprar viagra portugal tourism pendaftaran sma viagra generic seasonale generic recall for lipitor benadryl side effects in toddler metronidazole mechanism of action in rosacea cream ibuprofen side effects 600 mg daily diovan side effects 80 mg cialis cheap for woman buy hoodia diet 57 tacrolimus 0 03 ointment cost cetirizine hydrochloride tablets ip 10 mg prednisone what is main ingredient in benadryl brahmi online estradiol 2 mg drug information norvasc baownbeuv price maxalt prescription cost warfarin replacement australia black actors in cialis commercials monopril 10 mg leko where can i get liquid zantac pfizer viagra 100mg price in usa prices for cialis 20 mg take viagra for masterbation docusate colace nursing implications for aspirin real renova brno use of dexamethasone in cattle side effects of generic valtrex cheap finpecia buy online mabon 50 mg viagra tonner dolls for sale in uk zithromax pletal 100 mg vademecum farmaceutico metronidazole dosage uk doxycycline safe for pregnant women cialis pagar con paypal orlistat canada alli cheap viagra online australia shopping efek samping furosemide 40 mg zantac otc safe in pregnancy nombre generico del crestor kamagra uk fast delivery lipitor price usa zantac prescription australia what is for doxycycline 100 mg for cellulitis synthesis of aspirin green chemistry cheap tadalafil drops virectin vs viagra reviews tetracycline controlled promoters in las vegas dosage of maxalt mlt 10 mg tadalafil 20 mg soft erythromycin newborn canada amlodipine valsartan 10 320 mge linea 9 metro barcelona trazodone generic where can buy viagra over the counter in southampton combivent inhaler prices canada vardenafil tqeovertoz discount effexor 25 mg tablet sotalol side effects uk top consumer reviews on topamax lowest price cialis online quetiapine generic side effects fluoxetine 10 mg and weight gain valacyclovir generico precio mexico cost of azithromycin with insurance virender sehwag in aap ki adalat kapil what are the side effects of zocor 40 mg aricept 10 mg daily micronase generic divalproex 250 mg tab delayed release prednisone thyroxine 50 mg notice zofran available in ireland belgravia centre propecia for sale nootropil 1200 mg dawkowanie desmoxan side effects of lexapro 10 mg to 20mg side effects of panadol in infants how much albuterol to use in nebulizer terazosin 5 mg indicaciones geograficas priligy in farmacia costo betnovate capilar comprar casa dose of carvedilol in hypertension icd 9 zithromax z pak wholesale novo rabeprazole ec 20 mg melatonin buy low dose naltrexone singapore there generic form skelaxin coreg cr 20 mg coupons dapoxetine buy uk surgun best treatment for lithium induced acne baclofen dura 10 mg tabletten gegen meloxicam tab 7.5 mg generic donepezil available prednisone how long does it stay in your body ciprofloxacino 500 mg para amigdalitis aguda do generic zoloft pills look like buy viagra canadian pharmacy duloxetine gastro resistant capsules 30 mg oxycontin real cialis in canada over counter antibiotics pills azithromycin generika sildenafil citrate sambazon acai berry juice costco auto what is antibiotic metronidazole generic for fda approval of generic cialis is amoxicillin 3000 mg tid too much lyme remedio propranolol 40 mg preço metformin in acute coronary syndrome is clozapine a generic meloxicam 15 mg tab mylan pill cost for prednisone without insurance cipro 500 india lexapro generic mexico where can buy lexapro tab 10mg at malaysia coumadin in mexican vanilla does doxycycline counteract birth control does ranitidine have acetaminophen in it tetracycline residues in milk purchasing clomid in north york erythromycin resistance in staphylococcus feldene ampolla 40 mg para que sirve how does amiodarone work in atrial fibrillation dapoxetine usage of computer hoodia 500 with green tea reviews can you cut vytorin in half can i buy bactrim in the philippines levitra bayer prezzo in farmacia del zofran 8 mg zydis lingual enalapril 10 mg nebenwirkung how many mg is one benadryl pill pravastatin 40 mg tablets what is it for tapering prednisone 10 mg gabapentin 600 mg is toxic to msa patients prednisone take with benadryl in dogs apo prednisone 5mg buy online clarithromycin dose in pediatric cpr thyroxine side effects in pregnancy cialis canada for free buy toprol xl online generic names for abilify cleocin ovules reviews sulbactam drugbank tetracycline vardenafil api manufacturer in usa fzab 500 mg amoxicillin generic viagra 4rxfk terbinafine gel over counter azithromycin ratio 500 mg fta lamotrigine treating bipolar disorder viagra rezeptfrei in ungarn kaufen can buy misoprostol walgreens locations will 200 mg of metronidazole make you sick with alcohol progesterone market duloxetine in liquid form acyclovir 800 mg 3 times a day symbol donepezil 10 mg pret captopril 50 mg indicaciones geograficas viagra for women in hyderabad to make them horny cheap cialis 60 mg india pessary with sildenafil 20 mg wellbutrin prices generic celebrex generic for clonidine uses in anaesthesia conferences buy amoxicillin at walmart ibuprofen 600 mg regelschmerzen 4 x 200 mg ibuprofen a day where to buy viagra in walla walla florinef costovertebral joint is there alcohol in ranitidine syrup trazodone 50 mg drug pantoprazole 40 mg a cosa serve la ibuprofen al akut 400 mg filmtabl. 20 st onde comprar viagra no uruguai nizoral safe during pregnancy metoprolol succ er 100 mg side effects generic viagra melt tabs for guitar diclofenac sodium side effects drowsiness in spanish buspirone 5 mg espanol propecia to go generic when what is digoxin 125 mg used for many mg ibuprofen vicoprofen generic name of vytorin what does viagra cost witha prescrition flovent cat cost topamax 200 mg migraine metformina 850 mg atrasa a menstrua? cetirizine dihydrochloride 10 mg ??? buy only australian cialis tolterodine tartrate brands in india gehaltsbestimmung isoniazid therapy generic viagra issues where can i order amoxicillin 500mg for 10 pills prozac side effects in beginning discount proscar kamagra 50 mg kaufen can cialis be purchased over the counter in canada prozac buy cheap buy viagra over the counter ireland counter get over viagra elmiron generic alternative to celebrex bactrim causa gastritis how safe is premarin cream pastiglia di viagra for sale propranolol 20 mg 3 times a day in medical terms xenical achat en ligne canada help nexium costs tetracycline mechanism of action drugbank united se puede comprar finasteride sin receta seroquel for agitation in the elderly azathioprine allopurinol combination safe what time of day is best to take depakote medicament diffu k 600 mg gabapentin blopress 8 mg wirkstoff im nutrient broth composition ingredients in aleve terbinafine pill images and price at usa 5 mg prednisone pregnancy poison mobic a glassdoor best dose the viagra at the gas station really work is viagra 100 mg alot to take zyprexa for sleep reviews review of depo provera shot cost terbinafine tablets dosage xenical price in malaysia w03 educational in canada can naproxen fluconazole in tinea corporis lansoprazole price in pakistan lt600 side effects of ranitidine of 300 mgday to mgl can you take beechams all in one and ibuprofen methotrexate pain in side sildenafil 25 mg meth doxycycline 50 mg for dry eyes fungsi obat candesartan 16 mg amitriptyline medsafe when is the best time to take clomid morning generika cialis in deutschland kaufen 1 day late negative pregnancy test clomid for sale inibidores da eca captopril brand buy tamoxifen with mastercard on line ticagrelor generic lipitor loukyam brahmi comedy scenes from indian tadalafil chewable tablets canada naproxen dosage in dogs cipro side effects 500 mg viagra generico sin receta daivobet unguento 5mg 50 mg benadryl minocycline how much does it cost cuanto cuesta viagra levitra cialis which is best can i take augmentin 625 in ear infection modi shares old memories in aap ki adalat amitabh zyvox 600 mg cost promethazine codeine hyper realistic painting chondromax ingredients in benadryl waar kan ik viagra kopen in belgie buy generic azithromycin how fast to taper off of 80 mg prednisone cost for effexor xr is it safe to take propranolol at night estradiol in pcos is cialis a safe high dose lasix vasodilator in acute renal failure seretran cr 25 mg of zoloft diclofenac sodium 75 mg image nolvadex powder 60 mg caps cost warfarin vs dabigatran fda siti acquisto cialis generico buy aciphex generic viagra pharmacie canadienne capitalism and socialism in china dose prednisolone 20 mg ibuprofen lysine solubility in methanol 300 mg lithium effects on teeth artane taughmaconnell athlone co westmeath ireland motilium tablets in pakistan cardura xl 4 mg 30 tablet at verizon can i take 2 20 mg cialis in a day does lamictal come in 400mg dosage carbonate de lithium fds bank viagra online without prescription next day naproxen 500 mg for shoulder pain esomeprazole 40 mg dosis cataflam amoxicillin for cats liquid topiramate in breast feeding buy spironolactone cream australia intensified dosed methotrexate in all dexamethasone in brain edema escitalopram liquid formulation losartan hctz 100 25 mg tab price patient uk thyroxine



  1. The Earth Was Created in Six Days
  2. The Age of the Earth
  3. Inconsistencies between Genesis 1 and 2?

Tradition / Church Fathers


Back Home Next


I. The Earth Was Created in Six Days

Gen. 1:3,6,9,14,20,24,26 – God creates by saying “let there be...and there was...”  God’s Word brings into existence that which He desires.  If the creation story in Genesis is interpreted literally, then evolution (that matter, not God, formed things) is a false theory.  Should we interpret the book of Genesis literally?  The Catholic Church, in adopting the rule of St. Augustine, teaches “not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires; a rule to which it is the more necessary to adhere strictly in these times, when the thirst for novelty and unrestrained freedom of thought make the danger of error most real and proximate.” Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, No. 15, 1893.  This was affirmed by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, No. 36, 1950.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 116, also says: The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal." This is why the Church interprets literally, for example, Matt. 16:18 (Peter is the rock); Matt. 19:9 (remarriage after divorce is adultery); Matt. 26:26-28 (“this is my body”); John 6:51-58 (“eat my flesh”; “drink my blood”); John 3:5 (born of water means baptism); John 20:23 (“whose sins you forgive are forgiven”); 1 Peter 3:21 (“baptism saves you”); and James 5:14-15 (“anoint the sick with oil to save them and forgive their sins”).  There does not seem to be a compelling reason to depart from the literal and obvious sense of the following Scriptures which teach that God created all things out of nothing in six literal days.  Certainly, a literal interpretation is not untenable, nor does necessity require an alternative interpretation:

Gen. 1:5,8,13,19,23,31 – “and there was evening and there was morning, (one) day.”  When the Hebrew word for day (yom) is used with an ordinal number as it is in these verses, it always means a literal twenty-four hour period of time.  It never means an indefinite period.  The “evening and morning” phrase in connection with “day” proves that this is a twenty-four hour period of time.  See, for example, Ex. 16:8,12,13; 27:21; 29:39; Lev. 24:3; Num. 9:21; and Dan. 8:26 where “evening and morning” always refers to a twenty-four hour period.  Num. 20:15 – “we dwelt in Egypt a long time.” Here, the plural of “yom” (Hebrew, yomin) is used to describe “a long time.” The phrase uses “yommin rabbim” which means “many days.”  This is because that is what the verse literally intends to say.  In Genesis 1, the singular “yom” is used with an ordinal number to signify a single day.  Also, note that “yomin” is used over 700 times in the Bible, and it always refers to literal days.  Isa. 4:2 – “in that day the branch of the Lord shall be beautiful and glorious.”  Here, “yom” means an indefinite period.  But this is because it describes the Lord, whose glory lasts indefinitely.  Also, “yom” is not followed by an ordinal number like it is in the Genesis creation account, nor is it followed by “evening and morning” which refers to a single day. 

Gen. 2:7 – “then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground...”  Evolution says that man came from an ape, while Genesis says that man came from the ground.  This verse also shows that the Lord God “formed man.”  There is nothing about secondary causes forming man, even though evolution claims that secondary causes (apes, living matter) formed man and other living things over millions of years.

Gen. 2:19 – “So out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and bird of the air...”  This verse teaches us that God created the animals just like He created humans.  There is nothing to suggest a process of natural transformation.  God creates directly.

Gen. 1:20 – “And God said, let the waters swarm with the living soul of swarmers.” This is another verse which demonstrates that God, not the water, is doing the creating. The Hebrew for “swarm” (sharets) is not in the causative as it is used in other places in Scripture (e.g., Ex. 8:3; Psalm 105:30).

Gen. 1:24 – “let the earth bring forth living creatures...”  Evolutionists argue that this verse proves living creatures came from the earth, not from God.  But nothing in the texts suggests that God is not the one doing the creating.  When we view references to “earth” in the Genesis account, the phrase “earth bring forth” necessarily refers to “where” the animals were created, not “how” they were created.  There is no text in Genesis (or elsewhere in Scripture) that suggests the usage of “earth” is in a causative sense.

Psalm 104:30 – “When thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created...”  This verse tells us that God’s Spirit creates instantaneously.  Scripture never says that matter creates other matter, or that creation occurs over millions of years.

Psalm 104:2-10,14,19-20,24,24 – these are more verses which show that God directly creates, without using secondary causes. Job 38:4-13; 40:15; 41:31 – these are additional verses which reveal how God creates the things of creation.  There is no indication of any secondary causes.

2 Macc. 7:28 – “I beseech you, my child, to look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed. Thus also mankind comes into being.” This is a very explicit text from the inspired book of Maccabees which expressly rejects the theory of evolution.

Heb. 11:3 – “By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear.”  God reveals that He has created the universe “ex nihilo” (out of nothing).



II. The Age of the Earth—A Scriptural Chronology

Evolutionists teach that the earth is millions of years old. However, if the Scriptures are interpreted literally, they teach that the earth is only about 6170 years old (the precise date will depend upon which translation one uses: the Masoretic, the Septuagint, or the Samaritan Pentateuch). The following analysis of the detailed genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 (based on the Masoretic text), coupled with other biblical facts explained below, demonstrates that God created the world in 4165 B.C. That means in the year 2005, A.D., the world was 6170 years old. In the year 2010, A.D., the world will be 6175 years old (and so forth and so on). Following supports this conclusion:

Genesis 5 genealogies:

  • Adam was 130 years old when he had Seth (Gen. 5:3) = 130
  • Seth was 105 years old when he had Enos (Gen. 5:6) = 105 
  • Enos was 90 years old when he had Cainan (Gen. 5:9) = 90
  • Cainan was 70 years old when he had Maleel (Gen 5:12) = 70
  • Maleel was 65 years old when he had Jared (Gen 5:14) = 65
  • Jared was 162 years old when he had Henoch (Gen 5:18) = 162
  • Henoch was 65 years old when he had Mathusala (Gen 5:21) = 65
  • Mathusala was 187 years old when he had Lamech (Gen 5:25) = 187
  • Lamech was 182 years old when he had Noe (Gen 5:28) = 182
  • Noe was 500 years old when he had Sem, Cham and Japheth (Gen 5:31) = 500
  • The total years from the creation of Adam to Sem's birth = 1556 years
  • The total years from the creation to the flood = 1654 years (1556 + first 98 years of Sem's life)
  • The total years from creation to Noe's death is 2006 years (Gen 9:29 says Noe lived 950 years; so Noe was 500 years old at Sem's birth + he lived another 450 years, which means 1556 years + 450 years = 2006 years)

Genesis 11 genealogies:

  • Sem was 100 years old when he had Arphaxad (Gen 11:10) = 100 (the flood occurred 2 years earlier when Sem was 98; see Gen 11:10).
  • Arphaxad was 35 years old when he had Sale (Gen 11:12) = 35
  • Sale was 35 years old when he had Seber (Gen 11:14) = 35
  • Heber was 34 years old when he had Phaleg (Gen 11:16) = 34
  • Phaleg was 30 years old when he had Reu (Gen 11:18) = 30
  • Reu was 32 years old when he had Sarug (Gen 11:20) = 32
  • Sarug was 30 years old when he had Nachor (Gen 11:22) = 30
  • Nachor was 29 years old when he had Thare (Gen 11:24) = 29
  • Thare was 70 years old when he had Abram (Gen 11:26) = 70
  • Thus, the total years from Sem's birth to Abram's birth = 395 years 
  • The total years from creation to Abram's birth is 1951 years, which is 2006 total years from creation to Noe - 450 (950 total Noe years - 500 years when Sem was born) + 395 = 1951 years (this means Noe lived for the first 55 years of Abraham's life).
  • Or, 1556 years (creation to Sem's birth) + 395 years (Sem's birth to Abram's birth) = 1951 years from creation to Abram's birth.

We piece the rest of the time line together by the following facts and assumptions:

  • Extra-biblical evidence indicates that the division of the Davidic kingdom (between Rehoboam and Jeroboam) occurred at 931 B.C. (see 1 Kings 12). Support is found in 1 Kings 14:25 and 2 Chron. 2:12 which say that Shishak, who according to historical records rampaged Rehov in 925 B.C., came against Jerusalem in the fifth year of Rehoboam (or about 931 B.C.). We note that the footnote in the Douay-Rheims Bible for 3Kings 12 sets the division at 975 B.C., so there is a potential 44 year discrepancy. We use 931 B.C. based on the Masoretic text and the extrabiblical evidence which says that 931 B.C. is the year in which King Solomon died and the kingdom split.
  • Solomon reigned 40 years (1 Kings 11:42) which means he reigned from 971 B.C. to 931 B.C. There were 480 years between Solomons fourth year (967 B.C.) and the Exodus (1 Kings 6:1). This brings us to 1447 B.C. (967 + 480).
  • The Exodus lasted 430 years (Ex. 12:41), and commenced when Jacob entered into Egypt. This brings us to 1877 B.C. (1447 + 430). So the Exodus started in about 1877 B.C. and ended in 1447 B.C. This 430 time span is confirmed by Exodus 6:14-29 which adds the years of Levi (77 years), Koath (133 years), Amram (137 years) and Aarons age (83; see Ex. 7:7; Num. 33:39); 77 + 133 + 137 + 83 = 430 years.
  • Jacob lived to be 147 years old (Gen. 47:28), and lived in Egypt for 70 of those years (Gen. 47:28). This means Jacob was 77 when he entered into Egypt (147 70); 1877 + 77 = 1954 B.C. 
  • Isaac was 60 years old when he had Jacob (Gen. 25:26); 1954 + 60 = 2014 B.C. 
  • Abraham was 100 years old when he had Isaac (Gen. 21:5); 2014 + 100 = 2114 B.C. This puts Abrahams birth at about 2214 B.C. (2114 + 100), which was 1951 years after creation (see above). Abraham lived for 175 years (Gen. 25:7) which means Abraham died around 2039 B.C. Because Noe was 600 years old at the time of the flood (Gen 7:11), this means the world was about 1654 years old at the time of the flood (2006 - 950 + 600 = 1656 less 2 years of Sem; or 1556 years from Adam to Sem's birth + 98 years of Sem's life to the flood = 1654 years.
  • If Abram was born in 2214 B.C., and the flood occurred 297 years before Abram's birth (1951 years from creation to Abram's birth less 1654 years age of earth at flood), then the flood would have occurred at 2214 + 297 = 2511 B.C. (when the world was 1654 years old).
  • 1951 years from creation to Abram's birth + 2214 years from Abram's birth to the birth of Christ = 4165 years. This puts creation at 4165 B.C.
  • So when the world was 1654 years old at the flood, it was 2511 B.C. When the world was 1951 years old at Abram's birth, it was 2214 B.C. Here is the check: 2511 - 2214 = 297; 1951 - 1654 = 297 (the number of years from the flood to Abram's birth).

Thus, we have the following: 4165 B.C. + 2005 A.D. = 6170

4165 = (1951 years from creation to Abram's birth + 2214 years from Abram's birth to the birth of Christ) + 2005 years from the birth of Christ to the present day (2005, Anno Domini) =


6170 years (thus, the earth is a little over 6,000 years old).

Note: The Douay-Rheims Historical and Chronological Index to the Old Testament has Abram's birth in 2008 B.C. (versus our 2214 B.C. date) and creation at 3934 B.C. (versus our 4165 B.C. date). That means it has Abram being born 206 years closer to Christ (2214-2008) and creation occuring 231 years sooner (4165-3934). The primary reason why other chronologies are shorter than the foregoing chronology is that they do not allow the full 430 years of the Exodus. Our chronology includes the full 430 years and appears to be the most faithul to the biblical and extrabiblical evidence.



III. Inconsistencies Between Genesis 1 and 2?

Many people try to undermine the inerrancy of Genesis 1 and 2 by pointing out alleged “inconsistencies” between the two creation accounts. Of course, if Scripture is not inerrant, then the secularists can advance any theory they wish about creation and the age of the earth. Following are the most common “inconsistencies” raised by the secularists:

1.  Plants created before or after Adam?

Gen. 1:11-12 – God says “Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed.”  In this account, God made plants before He made man.

Gen. 2:5 – it says “when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and not every herb of the field had yet sprung up,…God formed man of dust from the ground.” In this account, it appears that God made plants after He made man.  How do we reconcile the two accounts? Well, none of the early Church Fathers had a problem harmonizing the texts, so 21st century Westerners should have no problem doing so.

In Gen. 1:11-12, it says that God made “herb” and the “tree producing fruit.” This refers to two kinds of vegetation. Gen. 1:11-12 also says that this vegetation produced “seed” (in Hebrew, dashah). These types of vegetation evidently served as food for Adam and Eve.

In Gen. 2:5, it refers to the “shrub,” which is a third type of vegetation, to be distinguished from that which is described in Genesis 1. This is further demonstrated by the fact that the text says that the “shrub” of Genesis 2 had not yet produced seed (in Hebrew, tsemach).  This is different from the dashah produced by the vegetation in Genesis 1.

Finally, Gen. 2:5 says “not every herb of the field had yet sprung up.” This indicates that some vegetation did already spring up, which is the different kind of vegetation described in Gen. 1:11-12 (the fruit-bearing vegetation versus the vegetation that had yet to bear fruit). Thus, Gen. 1:11-12 describes vegetation which immediately produced fruit, and Gen. 2:5 refers to vegetation whose fruit would bud in the next generation.  Is this an inconsistency? No.

2.  Animals created before or after Adam?

Gen. 1:24-25 – it says that God made “living creatures” before He made man.

Gen. 2:7 – it says that God made man, and then in Gen. 2:19 it says that God made the “living creatures.” It thus appears that God made the animals after He made man, whereas in Genesis 1 it says that God made the animals before He made man. Is this an inconsistency? No.

In Gen. 2:19, it says “out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field…and every bird of the air and brought them to the man to see what he would call them.” The Hebrew for “formed” is yatsar, which is in the past tense (not the present tense). This means that God “had already formed” the beasts and birds before He made man, which is consistent with Gen. 1:24-25.

This is bolstered by the fact that Gen. 2:18 says God was trying to find a “suitable helper” for Adam. Why? Since God already knew that the animals would not serve that role, it seems obvious that He would not have created them after Adam, only to discover what He already knew (that the animals would not be suitable helpers for Adam). The animals were already created. God “had formed” them before Adam. This alternative account poignantly sets the stage for God’s creation of Eve, the true suitable helper for Adam, with whom he would “be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.”

3.  Wasn’t Eve was created years after Adam?

If liberal exegetes can prove that Eve was created years after Adam, this supports their claim that the six-day creation account cannot be interpreted literally.  To that end, the liberals point out that “the Lord God planted a garden in Eden…and made grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food, the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Gen. 2:8-9). The liberals argue that since it takes years for trees to grow, Eve could not have been created on the sixth day. Such an interpretation limits God’s ability to create trees using natural processes, which is not how God was creating during the miraculous creation week. 

The more plausible (and correct) interpretation is that God created the trees ex nihilo, just as he created the heavens and the earth. The fact that Eve was later created ex nihilo from the side of Adam (as Pope Leo XIII affirms in Arcanum Divinae Sapientiae, 1880) demonstrates that God’s miraculous ex nihilo activity is occurring right to the very end of the creation week.

Similarly, the liberal exegetes point out that, after God created the trees in Gen. 2:8-9, He made a river flow out of Eden, which divided into four other rivers (Gen. 2:10). Again, they argue the creation of four rivers out of the river in Eden would have taken many years prior to the creation of Eve. Once again, such an argument limits God’s creating activity to natural processes. God could have created the rivers ex nihilo, and Gen 2:10 would only be describing how the newly created river of Eden joined them. 

Alternatively, since Gen. 2:10 does not say that the four rivers were created at that time, the rivers could have been separated with the rest of the waters on day three (see Gen. 1:9-13). The days of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 correspond as follows:

Day One:              1:1-5; 2:4-7
Day Two:              1:6-8; 2:8
Day Three:          1:9-13; 2:9-14
Day Four:             1:14-19; 2:15
Day Five:             1:20-23; 2:16-17
Day Six:                1:24-31; 2:18-24



Tradition / Church Fathers

The early Church Fathers were unanimous in their belief that God directly created all things out of nothing (not by an evolutionary process of secondary causes).  None of the Fathers’ views ever supported the possibility of an evolutionary process in creation.  The Fathers also agreed that God created the universe in six literal days.  St. Augustine introduced an alternative theory which proposed that God may have created the entire world in an instant (not in six days, and certainly not in millions of years).  However, Augustine also said that a six-day creation was possible as well.  Are the Fathers’ views important to us as we interpret the Scriptures?  The answer is: Yes, very important.

In 1564, the Council of Trent (Session IV, April 8), one of the Church’s most important councils and to which the Catholic conscience is bound forever, infallibly taught that no one could “in matters of faith and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine...interpret the sacred Scriptures...even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”  This infallible teaching was restated by the First Vatican Council in 1870.

Hence, the Church definitively teaches that the faithful cannot depart from the interpretation of the Fathers when they are unanimous in their interpretation of Scripture on a point of Revelation.  This also means that we must defer to the unanimous opinion of the Fathers in all matters of Revelation, not just religious matters. 

Pope Benedict XV stated that “by these precepts and limits [set by the Fathers of the Church]...wish, indeed, that inspiration itself pertain to all ideas, rather even to the individual words of the Bible...” Spiritus Paraclitus, September 15, 1920. The pope condemned contrary opinions by stating “For their belief is that that only which concerns religion is intended and is taught by God in the Scriptures; but that the rest, which pertains to the profane left to the feebleness of the writer...But how rashly, how falsely this is affirmed.” Ibid.

Why are the Fathers important?  The Church teaches that the Fathers are important because they received the rule of interpretations from the successors to the apostles and the apostles themselves.  The Fathers “endeavored to acquire the understanding of the Holy Scriptures not by their own lights and ideas, but from the writings and authority of the ancients, who in their turn, as we know, received the rule of interpretation in direct line from the Apostles.”  Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, No. 14, 1893. 

What did the Fathers teach regarding creation?

Irenaeus, (140-202): "For in as many days as this world was made, in so many thousand years shall it be concluded... in six days created things were completed..” (Against Heresies 5, 28, 3).

Clement of Alexandria (150-216): "From Adam to the deluge are comprised two thousand one hundred and forty-eight years, four days" (ANF, Vol. 2, p. 332).

Clement of Alexandria (150-216): "...but the earth is from the waters: and before the whole six days' formation of the things that were made, the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the water. The water was the beginning of the world..." (Catechetical Lectures, 3, 5).

Hippolytus (160-235): "But it was right to speak not of the ‘first day,' but of ‘one day,' in order that by saying ‘one,' he might show that it returns on its orbit, and, while it remains one, makes up the week...On the first day God made what He made out of nothing." (Genesis 1:5, 1:6; ANF, vol. 5, p. 163).

Hippolytus (160-235): "When, therefore, Moses has spoken of ‘the six days in which God made heaven and earth'...Simon, in a manner already specified, giving these and other passages of Scripture a different application from the one intended by the holy writers, defies himself.” Refutation of All Heresies, Book VI, Ch IX).

Theophilus (c. 185): "Of this six days' work no man can give a worthy explanation and description of all its parts...on account of the exceeding greatness and riches of the wisdom of God which there is in the six days' work above narrated" (Autolycus 2,12).

Theophilus (c. 185):  “God...made the existent out of the non-existent.” (Autolycus 2,4).

Theophilus (c. 185):  “On the fourth day the luminaries came into existence.  Since God has foreknowledge, he understood the nonsense of the foolish philosophers who were going to say that the things produced on earth came from the stars, so that they might set God aside.  In order therefore that the truth might be demonstrated, plants and seeds came into existence before the stars.  For what comes into existence later cannot cause what is prior to it.”  Theophilus, 2.15.

Theophilus (c. 185):  “...the world is created and is providentially governed by the God who made everything.  And the whole period of time and the years can be demonstrated to those who wish to learn the truth...The total number of years from the creation of the world is 5,695.”  Theophilus, 3.25, 28.

Theophilus (c. 185):  “If some period has escaped our notice, says 50 and 100 or even 200 years, at any rate it is not myriads, or thousands or years as it was for Plato...and the rest of those who wrote falsehoods.  It may be that we do not know the exact total of all the years simply because the additional months and days are not recorded in the sacred books.” Theophilus, 3.29.

Origen (c. 200):  “the Mosaic account of the creation, which teaches that the world is not yet ten thousand years old, but very much under that.” Origen, Against Celsus, 1.19.

Lactantius (250-317): "God completed the world and this admirable work of nature in the space of six days, as is contained in the secrets of Holy Scripture, and consecrated the seventh day...For there are seven days, by the revolutions of which in order the circles of years are made up...Therefore, since all the works of God were completed in six days, the world must continue in its present state through six ages, that is, six thousand years...For the great day of God is limited by a circle of a thousand years, as the prophet shows, who says, ‘In Thy sight, O Lord, a thousand years are as one day." ..And as God labored during those six days in creating such great works, so His religion and truth must labor during these six thousand years... (Institutes 7,14).

Victorinus (c. 280): "God produced the entire mass for the adornment of his majesty in six days. On the seventh day, he consecrated it with a blessing" (On the Creation of the World).

Ephrem the Syrian (306-373): "‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,' that is, the substance of the heavens and the substance of the earth. So let no one think that there is anything allegorical in the works of the six days. No one can rightly say that the things that pertain to these days were symbolic." (Commentary on Genesis,1:1, FC 91:74)

Methodius (c. 311): “For you seem to me, O Theophila, to have discussed those words of the Scripture amply and clearly, and to have set them forth as they are without mistake. For it is a dangerous thing wholly to despise the literal meaning, as has been said, and especially of Genesis, where the unchangeable decrees of God for the constitution of the universe are set forth, in agreement with which, even until now, the world is perfectly ordered, most beautifully in accordance with a perfect rule, until the Lawgiver Himself having re-arranged it, wishing to order it anew, shall break up the first laws of nature by a fresh disposition. But, since it is not fitting to leave the demonstration of the argument unexamined – and, so to speak, half-lame – come let us, as it were completing our pair, bring forth the analogical sense, looking more deeply into the Scripture; for Paul is not to be despised when he passed over the literal meaning, and showed that the word extended to Christ and the Church.” (Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse III, Ch 2).

Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386): "In six days God made the world...The sun, however resplendent with bright beams, yet was made to give light to man, yea, all living creatures were formed to serve us: herbs and trees were created for our enjoyment...The sun was formed by a mere command, but man by God's hands" (Catechetical Lectures 12, 5).

Epiphanius (315-403): "Adam, who was fashioned from the earth on the sixth day and received breath, became a living being (for he was not, as some suppose, begun on the fifth day, and completed on the sixth; those who say have the wrong idea), and was simple and innocent, without any other name." (Panarion 1:1, translated by Phillip R. Amidon).

Basil (329-379):  “’And there was evening and morning, one day.’ Why did he say ‘one’ and not ‘first?’  He said ‘one’ because he was defining the measure of day and night.., since the twenty-four hours fill up the interval of one day.” (Hexameron 2, 8).

Basil (329-379): "Thus were created the evening and the morning. Scripture means the space of a day and a night...If it therefore says ‘one day,' it is from a wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to combine the time that they contain. Now twenty-four hours fills up the space of one day – we mean of a day and of a night" (Hexameron 2, 8).  Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, called Basil’s interpretation of Genesis 1 an “overall great commentary (PG 18, 705-707).

Gregory of Nyssa (335-394): "Before I begin, let me testify that there is nothing contradictory in what the saintly Basil wrote about the creation of the world since no further explanation is needed. They should suffice and alone take second place to the divinely inspired Testament. Let anyone who hearkens to our attempts through a leisurely reading be not dismayed if they agree with our words. We do not propose a dogma which gives occasion for calumny; rather, we wish to express only our own insights so that what we offer does not detract from the following instruction. Thus let no one demand from me questions which seem to fall in line with common opinion, either from holy Scripture or explained by our teacher. My task is not to fathom those matters before us which appear contradictory; rather, permit me to employ my own resources to understand the text's objective. With God's help we can fathom what the text means which follows a certain defined order regarding creation. ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth' [Gen 1.1], and the rest which pertains to the cosmogenesis which the six days encompass." (Hexaemeron, PG 44:68-69).

Ambrose (340-397): "But Scripture established a law of twenty-four hours, including both day and night, should be given the name of day only, as if one were to say the length of one day is twenty-four hours in extent." (Hexameron 1:37, FC 42:42).

Ambrose (340-397): "In the beginning of time, therefore God created heaven and earth. Time proceeds from this world, not before the world. And the day is a division of time, not its beginning." (Hexameron 1:20, FC 42:19).

Ambrose (340-397): "But now we seem to have reached the end of our discourse, since the 6th day is completed and the sum total of the work has been concluded." (Hexameron 6:75, FC 42:282).

Chrysostom (344-407): "Acknowledging that God could have created the world ‘in a single day, nay in a single moment,' he chose ‘a sort of succession and established things by parts' that, accurately interpreted by that blessed prophet Moses, we do not fall in with those who are guided by human reasonings" (PG, Homily 3, col 35).

Victorinus (c. 355-361): "The Creation of the World: In the beginning God made the light, and divided it in the exact measure of twelve hours by day and by night, for this reason, doubtless, that day might bring over the night as an occasion of rest for men's labours; that, again, day might overcome, and thus that labour might be refreshed with this alternate change of rest, and that repose again might be tempered by the exercise of day. "On the fourth day He made two lights in the heaven, the greater and the lesser, that the one might rule over the day, the other over the night... (cf. (NPNF1, vol. 7, pp. 341-343)."

Augustine (354-430):  “Some hold the same opinion regarding men that they hold regarding the world itself, that they have always been...And when they are asked, how…the reply that most, if not all lands, were so desolated at intervals by fire and flood, that men were greatly reduced in numbers, and...thus there was at intervals a new beginning made…But they say what they think, not what they know.  They are deceived…by those highly mendacious documents which profess to give the history of many thousand years, though reckoning by the sacred writings, we find that not 6,000 years have yet passed.”  Augustine, The City of God, 12.10.




In affirming the Church Fathers and the Tradition of the Church, the Magisterium has infallibly taught that God created all things, material and spiritual, out of nothing.  Here is a very brief chronology of the Church’s teaching on the creation of the universe:

561 – Pope Pelagius I writes a letter to King Childebert I in which he states: “For I confess that...Adam and his wife, were not born of other parents, but were created, the one from the earth, the other from the rib of man.”  The early Church always affirmed that man was formed from the earth, and not from an ape.

1215 – Lateran Council IV – “God created both orders out of nothing from the beginning of time, the spiritual and corporeal, that is, the angelic and the earthly.”  The Lateran Council infallibly proclaims that God created the spiritual (angels) and corporeal (humans, animals, plants, heavenly bodies) “out of nothing” (ex nihilo). 

1860 – Council of Cologne – “Our first parents were formed immediately by God.  Therefore, we declare that…those...who… emerged from spontaneous continuous change of imperfect nature to the more perfect, is clearly opposed to Sacred Scripture and to the Faith.”  The Church again affirms that man is not the product of an evolutionary process.  Man was formed “immediately.”

1870 – Vatican Council I issues an infallible dogmatic statement with an accompanying anathema:  “If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing, let him be anathema.”  Once again, the Church infallibly proclaims that “the world and all things” in it are the product of an ex nihilo creation.  In addition, the Church, for the first time, adds the phrase “as regards their whole substance.”  This phrase essentially prevents anyone from advancing the theory of evolution (that is, arguing that God made some parts, but evolution contributed to the other parts).  Moreover, the Church affirms Lateran Council IV that both the “spiritual and material” were made out of nothing.  Spiritual refers to the creation of angels, and no one has argued that angels were created by an evolutionary process.  There is never any distinction between how God created the angels (instantaneously, out of nothing) and how God created humans (instantaneously, out of nothing). 

1880 – Pope Leo XIII writes his encyclical Arcanum Divinae Sapientiae in which he states:  “We record what is to all known, and cannot be doubted by any, that God, on the sixth day of creation, having made man from the slime of the earth, and breathed into his face the breath of life, gave him a companion, whom He miraculously took from the side of Adam when he was locked in sleep.” Pope Leo’s interpretation of Genesis suggests a literal six day creation.  This is because he says Eve was “miraculously” created.  Since miracles happen instantaneously, Pope Leo is saying Eve was created instantaneously, on the sixth day.  It is thus logical to assume Pope Leo believed Adam was also created instantaneously, like Eve, on the sixth day.  There is no methodological distinction between Adam and Eve, and nothing to suggest that their creation was from an evolutionary process that took millions of years.  Pope Leo’s encyclical is in line with the infallible teachings of Lateran Council IV, Vatican Council I, and the early Church Fathers. Moreover, Pope Leo XIII issued this teaching only about 20 years after Darwin’s theory of evolution came on the scene.

1950 – On August 12, Pope Pius XII issues the encyclical Humani Generis which addressed false opinions that were threatening to undermine Catholic doctrine.  The pope, in echoing St. Augustine and Providentissimus Deus, declared that the modern exegete’s desire to depart from a literal interpretation of Scripture in favor of a non-literal interpretation was foreign to Catholic teaching: “Further, according to their fictitious opinions, the literal sense of Holy Scripture and its explanation, carefully worked out under the Church's vigilance by so many great exegetes, should yield now to a new exegesis, which they are pleased to call symbolic or spiritual” (no. 23). “Everyone sees how foreign all this is to the principles and norms of interpretation rightly fixed by our predecessors of happy memory, Leo XIII in his Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, and Benedict XV in the Encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus, as also by Ourselves in the Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu” (no. 24). The pope also broached the theory of evolution with caution by stating that the Church “does not forbid research and discussions...with regard to evolution,” but warns that “divine revelation demands the greatest moderation and caution” when so discussing, and says we must ultimately “submit to the judgment of the Church” (no. 36). The pope further condemned “polygenism,” the heretical belief that the human race is not the product of a single set of parents (Adam and Eve), but multiple parents, as evolutionary theory maintains.



Copyright 2001 - 2007 © by John Salza. All Rights Reserved.