Christianity Today

I just found this. Fascinating! "Most Ancient Hebrew Biblical Inscription Deciphered, Scholar Says" "The significance of this breakthrough relates to the fact that at least some of the biblical scriptures were composed hundreds of years before the dates presented today in research and that the Kingdom of Israel already existed at that time." English translaton of the deciphered text: 1' you shall not do [it], but worship the [Lord]. 2' Judge the sla[ve] and the wid[ow] / Judge the orph[an] 3' [and] the stranger. [Pl]ead for the infant / plead for the po[or and] 4' the widow. Rehabilitate [the poor] at the hands of the king. 5' Protect the po[or and] the slave / [supp]ort the stranger. Take that you so-called OT scholars who sneer at an early dating of the OT.

My Theologian friend may be right that Genesis 1 and 2 are not science text, but that leaves us with a vacuum. In this vacuum steps scientists, the offspring of fallen man in a fallen creation, and we are to buy into their creation myth because they have scientific evidence. Their version is replacement theology for our "creation myth" (which by the way DOES subject us to natural theology). But the real reason for my comment was to beg, BEG someone to answer what the LORD wishes us to glean from this: And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept; and He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh thereof, and the rib which the LORD God had taken from man, made He a woman and brought her unto the man. And Adam said "this is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh, she shall be called woman because she was taken out of man". I implore you oh learned ones, cipher to me the meaning of this vision.

... the Word of truth, coming as it does, as a whole, from one and the same Divine Author, is its own context. That is to say, a particular passage is to be regarded not only in the relation it bears to its own ... context; but, in the relation which it bears to the Word of God as a whole. It may not be intended to teach science, chronology, or history ... but, everything that it records will be in perfect harmony with whatever is true of any or all of these. Scientia means knowledge, and nothing in Scripture will be found to contradict what we really know, which is true science. Much that goes by the name of "science" is only hypothesis; and, in much more, supposition is so mixed up with knowledge that the result is vitiated. All must be brought to the bar of the Divine Word. That Word as a whole is the context for its every part. All that is outside the two covers of the Word of God must be judged by what is within. We must not reverse this process. (E.W. Bullinger)

Compare interpretations of Genesis 1 with interpretations of Christ's resurrection. How would scientists handle the resurrection using nothing but knowledge we have today of the natural sciences? They would say resurrection is impossible because it violates the laws of physics and biology. Therefore Jesus must not have actually died and his recovery took longer than 3 days, probably months. The only reason we know about the resurrection is the eye witness accounts. The only way we can know about the creation is through an eye witness account, but God is the only witness. Science cannot prove or disprove a miracle because miracles by definition violate physics. So if the creation was a miracle that took six day, then physics would lead us astray and convince us it was not a miracle. Science can tell us nothing about miracles.

Mike, no I don't think Genesis 1 is a scientific account of creation. The commonly understood definition of science limits the word to the natural sciences. Of course Moses did not know modern natural science. Creation was a miracle. Science can tell us nothing about miracles because by definition miracles violate the laws of physics as we know them. But Genesis one is an accurate historical account of creation. Get a book on hermeneutics and see if you can force "evening and morning" to mean anything other than a 24-hour day using Aristotle's principles.