Genesis 15:17 and 19:23 — Do References to the Sun "Going Down" or "Rising" Contradict Scientific Reality?

Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Free for All

$5.00

Introduction: Does the Bible Use Scientifically Inaccurate Language?

Genesis 15:17 states:

“When the sun had gone down and it was dark, look, a smoking firepot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces.” (UASV)

Genesis 19:23 similarly reads:

“The sun had risen over the earth when Lot came to Zoar.” (UASV)

Critics of the Bible sometimes argue that verses like these reflect an unscientific worldview, accusing the biblical text of perpetuating the “mistaken” idea that the sun literally moves up and down over the earth—a notion refuted by modern astronomy, which demonstrates that the earth rotates, causing the appearance of sunrise and sunset. Such criticism claims that this kind of phenomenological language exposes the Bible as scientifically inaccurate, thus undermining claims of inerrancy.

However, this argument is both linguistically naïve and philosophically shallow. It misrepresents the intent of the text, misunderstands the use of observational language, and imposes modern categories of scientific discourse upon ancient narrative literature. A proper application of the historical-grammatical method, rooted in understanding the author’s intent, reveals no contradiction between these verses and known scientific facts. The Bible’s use of everyday, observational expressions does not invalidate its truthfulness or inerrancy.

The Nature of Phenomenological Language

The key to answering this objection is recognizing the use of phenomenological language—language that describes things as they appear to human observers. Every culture and language, including modern scientific discourse, employs such language in daily communication.

Terms like “sunrise” and “sunset” are not exclusive to ancient Hebrew; they are still found in contemporary meteorology, astronomy, and common speech. For instance:

Modern weather services report “sunset at 7:43 PM.”
Astronomical almanacs list the times of “sunrise” and “sunset.”
News broadcasts say, “Tomorrow’s sunrise will be at 6:11 AM.”

None of these uses are deemed unscientific. Why? Because they describe the observable effect, not the astrophysical mechanics behind it. Even highly trained scientists use phenomenological expressions because they are the most meaningful and intelligible way to describe visual events from an earthbound perspective.

Thus, when Genesis says, “the sun had gone down” or “the sun had risen,” it is speaking from the vantage point of the human observer. This is entirely consistent with how language functions. The use of observational expressions does not imply ignorance or error—it reflects communication in context, which is exactly what we should expect from an inspired record intended for all people of all times.

The Author’s Perspective and Literary Intent

Genesis was written by Moses under divine inspiration. The historical-grammatical method requires that we interpret his words as he and his audience would have understood them. Moses was not presenting a scientific treatise on heliocentrism or the mechanics of planetary motion; he was writing historical narrative, using normal language that reflects human experience.

Genesis 15:17 and 19:23 do not claim that the sun physically moves around the earth. Instead, they describe the time of day in relation to human activity and divine intervention:

In Genesis 15:17, the “sun going down” marks the onset of evening, setting the stage for God’s covenantal sign with Abram.
In Genesis 19:23, the “sun rising” is a time marker showing Lot’s arrival in Zoar just before the judgment on Sodom.

In both cases, the language is functional and relational, not scientific. Moses is not offering a cosmological theory; he is anchoring events in observable reality.

This is not a concession to error. It is, in fact, an acknowledgment of linguistic normalcy—that God, through His inspired writers, spoke in ways that are meaningful to human beings without violating truth. Jesus Himself used such language:

“For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good…” (Matthew 5:45)

No critic has ever seriously suggested that Jesus denied the earth’s rotation. He, like Moses, spoke from the human vantage point.

Scripture’s Inerrancy and Accommodation to Human Communication

The doctrine of inerrancy holds that the Bible is without error in all that it affirms, including matters of history and science, when rightly interpreted. It does not require that the Bible always use technical or scientific terminology. Nor does it deny the use of metaphor, idiom, or observational language.

Inerrancy must be assessed on the basis of what the Bible intends to teach, not by importing expectations foreign to the text. To charge the Bible with scientific error based on language like “sunset” or “sunrise” is to misrepresent both the genre and the purpose of the text. It is also a standard inconsistently applied, since even modern scientists use the same terminology.

Moreover, Scripture itself acknowledges that divine truth is communicated in human terms:

Numbers 12:8 – God speaks to Moses “mouth to mouth… and not in dark speech.”
Hebrews 1:1 – “God, having spoken long ago to the fathers by the prophets in many parts and in many ways…”

The Holy Spirit used the vocabulary, idioms, and expressions of the time to communicate infallible truth to fallible humans. This includes the use of ordinary, observational language. It is no compromise of divine truth—it is the condescension of God to meet mankind in his own communicative context.

Comparing to Other Scriptural Usages

Many other biblical passages use the same type of language without implying scientific error:

Ecclesiastes 1:5 – “The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hurries to the place where it rises.”
Psalm 104:19 – “He made the moon for the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.”
Malachi 1:11 – “From the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations.”

None of these texts are teaching cosmology. They are teaching theological or chronological truths using universally understood expressions. To treat such statements as errors reveals a categorical failure to distinguish between descriptive and prescriptive language.

The Desperation of the Critic’s Argument

The claim that verses like Genesis 15:17 and 19:23 prove the Bible is scientifically inaccurate is not only linguistically uninformed—it reflects a desperate attempt to discredit Scripture through pedantic and misapplied standards. Critics who raise this objection ignore how language naturally functions and impose a rigid scientism that no literature—ancient or modern—can meet, including their own.

To insist that the Bible can only be true if it uses post-Copernican, technical astrophysical terminology is to engage in chronological snobbery and hermeneutical distortion. It is an argument from false expectation, not from legitimate textual analysis.

In fact, such criticisms reveal the strength of the Bible’s communicative clarity. That a text written nearly 3,500 years ago still communicates clearly to modern readers testifies to its enduring relevance, not its scientific deficiency.

Conclusion: Descriptive Language Does Not Equal Error

Genesis 15:17 and 19:23 do not present a scientific contradiction. They use phenomenological language—just as we do today—to describe events as observed from a human perspective. This does not undermine the Bible’s truthfulness, accuracy, or inerrancy. Rather, it reflects its accessibility and universal comprehensibility.

Biblical inerrancy, properly understood, affirms that the Bible speaks truly in all it affirms, including when it uses normal human expressions. Far from undermining faith, these verses reaffirm that God speaks to us in language we understand—without error, without confusion, and without the need for scientific jargon. The real error lies not in Scripture, but in the artificial standards imposed upon it by those unwilling to read it honestly and contextually.

Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Free for All

$5.00

You May Also Enjoy

How Are We to Understand the Alleged Errors in the Bible?

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).