What is an overview of the main interpretations of "day" in Genesis 1?

My understanding, is the "Day" refers to a certain period of time and not necessary 24 hrs or 1000 years. It could be 1,000,000 years, or it could be 1 hour, we'll never know. For God, time is irrelevant and time doesn't apply to Him the same way as it does to us here on earth. In fact, if you read the Bible carefully, each day (time period) of creation starts with evening and ends with morning (there was evening and there was morning, day one). What I think evening refers to is darkness, chaos, non existence of something, and morning refers to completion/creation of something, visibility, light. Thus, it describes time period that only God knows how long it was, translating into earthly hours, days or years. We can clearly see this in creation of light (day one). At first, there was darkness and after the light was created, God called this period of creation time "day" one. We also see that the 7th day (day of rest) still continuities even at present time. The Bible does not say "there was evening and there was morning" about the 7th day.

Peter, when he says that for God, one day is like a 1000 years simply states that a period of day for God could be any length of time. Notice, he says "like" and not exactly 1000 years.

I believe that all the suggestions for the 3 different types of period of time are possible. A day in the Lord is different to the day of man being a thousand years in our time. If a reference to God doing something would more likely relate to his time than to mans meaning a thousand years. When Adam was naming the animals would be in the lords time as the fall had not taken place so may have taken many days in the time of man. Adams mortal life did not begin until the fall and happened when cast out of the garden of Eden. No one knows the time period from before the fall to the time he was cast out of the garden of Eden. I feel that it is more likely to be a thousand years for each day creation or maybe a period of time. I suggest it took a while as things of such a grand nature do not happen quickly like preparing and planning for a weeding or party can take longer than the weeding itself. Scientist seem to think it would be a long period of time so makes the 24 hour day seem less possible to me.

Having trouble replying to comments here, but I'd also like to point out that some interpretations place us in the Eighth day, which begins on the Resurrection. Some that did this still interpreted the Genesis days as literal Earth Days, but others did not, which may show that the treatment of 'day' in Genesis as 24-hours is simply an interpretive choice and has never been so clear as to be open-and-shut.

If you take the story literally, it's clear from the context that it must be a 24 hour day. For example, night and day is mentioned, where night clearly means darkness. A day really means 1000 years, for example, then the story says it was dark for a large portion of that "day" = 1000 years. Say this is 300 years. Then, there was darkness on the earth for 300 years. All the life God just created would die in the extreme cold that would happen in 300 years of darkness, not to mention plants couldn't live without the light from the sun even if they could survive the cold. And, since the "day" and "night" were caused by the sun shining on that portion of the earth, or not, respectively, God would have had to slow the rotation of the earth considerably for that to be possible. For one, it doesn't make sense that God would later speed it up. For two, I'm sure that would throw off all sorts of things, which would also make life not possible.

If you don't take the story literally, then who cares if that word means day or not because it's just a symbol any way.

I'm not familiar with the NLT, but in the KJV it says it a little bit differently: "the evening and the morning were the first (second, third, etc) day." And that's all it says. It doesn't say that these days were 24 hours long. It doesn't even say that they were all as long as each other. In fact, you'd have some difficulty claiming that the first two "days" meant the same thing as they do to us today, because we mark days by the sun, which didn't show up until the third day!

(This isn't as absurd as it sounds, BTW, if you consider this an account of a vision of the Creation, shown from the perspective of an observer on the Earth's surface, and not out in space somewhere. "Out in space somewhere" makes sense as a point of view to our generation, but certainly not to a nation of shepherds with no concept of science fiction! From the surface, at the very beginning, it would take quite a while before the skies became clear enough to see the sun and the moon, even though some light would filter through long before then.)

The problem is, the text doesn't go into much detail as to exactly what is meant. Some people have suggested that the Earth was created on God's time, where "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years" (2 Peter 3: 8), which in turn could mean literally 1000 years, or simply "an arbitrarily long period of time."

Personally, I find it more important to believe that God created the world, that he put us here upon it, and that he did it all for a reason, than to worry about the details of exactly how it was done or how long it took. I figure if He were to try to explain how He did it to me, I'd end up completely lost within the first five minutes anyway!

I would like to present this article:

"In the Scriptural record the account of each of the six creative days concludes with the statement: “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning” a first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth day. (Ge 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) The seventh day, however, does not have this ending, indicating that this period, during which God has been resting from his creative works toward the earth, continued on. At Hebrews 4:1-10 the apostle Paul indicated that God’s rest day was still continuing in his generation, and that was more than 4,000 years after that seventh-day rest period began. This makes it evident that each creative day, or work period, was at least thousands of years in length. As A Religious Encyclopaedia (Vol. I, p. 613) observes: “The days of creation were creative days, stages in the process, but not days of twenty-four hours each.”—Edited by P. Schaff, 1894."

We cannot be sure of the exact time God spent creating the earth. What is time to someone who always was and always will be? When we are able to speak with God again, then maybe he will answer this question.

There are few really clear contextual clues to the interpretation. The word can, and clearly does, mean either "24 hours" or "a period of time", in other contexts, and biblical interpreters have disagreed over which one it means here for a very long time.

It is perhaps significant to note that this disagreement has gone on for many centuries, and long before there was any scientific evidence to point to an old earth. What it is certainly not is an attempt to 'retrofit' an interpretation to Genesis in the light of new science.

There are two levels of meaning here. First, what does "day" mean in the context of the story, and second, what is the meaning of the story itself.

Suppose I asked, "What does the word 'trees' mean in the following passage?"

Judges 9:8-15 NRSV

The trees once went out to anoint a king over themselves. So they said to the olive tree, "Reign over us.' The olive tree answered them, "Shall I stop producing my rich oil by which gods and mortals are honored, and go to sway over the trees?' Then the trees said to the fig tree, "You come and reign over us.' But the fig tree answered them, "Shall I stop producing my sweetness and my delicious fruit, and go to sway over the trees?' Then the trees said to the vine, "You come and reign over us.' But the vine said to them, "Shall I stop producing my wine that cheers gods and mortals, and go to sway over the trees?' So all the trees said to the bramble, "You come and reign over us.' And the bramble said to the trees, "If in good faith you are anointing me king over you, then come and take refuge in my shade; but if not, let fire come out of the bramble and devour the cedars of Lebanon.'

It seems clear to me that the word "trees", within the context of the story, is not used allegorically. It refers to perennial woody plants. But that's not the main point. The whole story is an allegory. There are clues to this: The trees can talk; they desire a king.

Likewise, the word "day" in the context of the story of Genesis 1 refers to "evening and morning", not an unspecified time period. But what is the purpose of the story itself? That's the larger meaning that must be considered.

Like the story of the trees in Judges 9, Genesis 1 gives us clues that the story itself is not meant as history. For example, the first three days pass without the sun. Most Christians even in ancient times caught that hint.

But if the story is not meant as history, then what does it mean? I think dleyva3's answer, ironically, points us to the non-historical meaning. Genesis 1 is a liturgical story. Its purpose is to remind us, as we gather for worship every seventh day, that we are made in the image of God. The story reinforces that, not only by stating it outright, but by incorporating the sabbath day into the creation story itself.

The Hebrew word "Yom" can be translated as meaning any finite and bounded period of time; how it should be translated in a given context is dependent on that context. With reference to the creation account, one must also take into account the numerous other scriptures that speak of creation and their use of "Yom".

With relationship to the days described in Genesis, Jewish theologian and physicist Gerald Schroeder comments on the words "evening" and "morning" in his book "Genesis and the Big Bang" that the same words can equally be translated "disorder" and "order", respectively. This derives from the fact the the Hebrews saw approaching night as bringing disorder and approaching morning as bringing order.

Applying Gerald's ideas, one could possibly read Genesis 1 as along the lines of "and there was disorder, and there was order, the first age".

Just food for thought. A more detailed treatment is available on my website: http://softwaremonkey.org/Article/Religion/Old-Earth-Creation#Days

The story in Genesis is 100% clear about what "day" means--- it means a day, like in normal language, and it should not be reinterpreted in light of scientific discoveries. It is not scientifically accurate, but reflects the false beliefs of that era, much like everything else in the bible.

The creation story has the following phases:

1. God creates the earth and the sky, light, day and night.
2. God beats out a celestial dome, and puts this dome over the (flat) Earth, and puts some water above the sky-dome and some water below.
3. God pools the water under the sky-dome into seas, and leaves dry land.
4. God puts plants on the dry-land
5. Gods puts animals and fish, birds under the sky dome
6. God makes people
7. Done

In Genesis, the universe is consistently divided into three parts.

• The "sky", which is a big dome made out of a malleable beat out substance, covering our heads with water on top of it, water that leaks down as rain.
• A flat square Earth with four corners below, with sea generally covering the western part and land to the east.
• An infinite sea below called "the abyss", which extends downward forever.

In the bible, the words "Tehom" (Abyss) is used to describe the infinite watery sea below. The word "Sheol" describes a similar idea of the underworld. An interesting quote is from Issac or Jacob, before he dies, he says "Oh breasts up above, watery abyss below", which suggests that the sky is considered like the breasts, and the abyss like the womb, thinking of the universe as a gigantic fertility symbol woman type thing. That might also be what the mysterious "El-Shaddai" means (God of my-breast(s)), it might mean "God of the Sky", where the sky is the breasts of the woman-figure.

These ideas are normal everyday 10th century BC cosmology, and it is essentially the Babylonian conception of the universe. If you impose an anachronistic scientifically accurate rereading of Genesis, it stops making sense, and becomes a lot less interesting or readable. The stories are not meant to be read with a modern picture in mind.

While it's true that the word for "day" denotes a word for a period of time that is usually used for a 24 hour period, that same word is translated "day" in the following verse and can only be interpreted to describe a literal 24 hour period. The following understanding of the creation account sheds light on the understanding and intent of the writer of Genesis.

Exodus 20:9,11 KJV

Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: ...For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

The word is yowm (Strong's H3117), and is used both in the creation account and this verse. Your question pertains to Genesis 1, but certainly Exodus informs our understanding of Biblical text, especially since Exodus is not written in poetic language. The context of the creation juxtaposed with the literal seven day week and the Sabbath means both are the same length of time, and both are one literal day. While some argue that Genesis is not intended to be taken literally, this is not the case with Exodus.