Bible Study Fellowship

For the last two weeks I have been attending BSF, which is not Baptist Student Foundation, its Bible Study Fellowship. Its pretty intense Bible study that gathers Christians from all denominations. There's even homework. Each week they start you off reading an overview and then assign biblical texts with questions for the week. Than you meet together on Mondays to share notes. If you haven't answered the question at home they don't let you talk in discussion. (Which seems a little harsh, but I can see why they would do that.)

Bsf usually studies one book a year and this year's book is Genesis. I went to the study both dreading it and looking forward to it. I love Genesis, but I have also found it at times to be one of the most devisive books in the bible. The first discussion was an overview, and everybody was very gracious and no one seemed to want to excomunicate anyone else for believing something different about the Bible. (Maybe this is a sign that I'm not in a college aged Bible study anymore.) And noby thought that the Earth was created on October 18, 4004 BC

So I went home to read the Overview of Genesis 1. Unfortuantely, I think the author is missing the point of the book. They spent 95% of the article talking about the science of Genesis (sorry John) and it was actually pretty biased. Hardly any discussion on application of the passage which is something BSF prides itself on.

They listed the different theories and gave this introduction which made me hopeful:

Such diversity among biblical scholars who accept the authority of the Bible requires that we be humble and cautious before forming our own conclusion and to avoid divisive self-confident dogmatism that obscures the intent and message of the passage-the creative power of the Triune God.

So they listed Atheistic evolution (not sure why), Intellegent Design, Thesistic evolution, the gap (resitution) theory, progressive creationism, and finally the literal, six-days viewpoint- with this little summation statement:

This viewpoint [literal, six-days] is both biblical and scientific, so the professing Christian must give is the most serious consideation

So much for avoiding divisive self-confident dogmatism that obscures the intent and message of the passage.

My question is, why do we look at a poem and try to extrapolate scientific fact from it? If we looked at e.e. cummings poem, "She Being Like New", we might think that a woman really is a car not a woman. (Granted, e.e. cummings is not the Inspired Word of God.) Hebrew poetry often intorduces several ideas and then echoes the idea again and adds details. So at the risk of sounding divisive self-confident and dogmatic, here's how I look at Genesis 1:

Genesis 1:1-5 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

Gensis 1:6-8 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

Genesis1:9-13 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

Genesis 1:14-19 [paralell to day 1]

And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

Genesis 1:20-22 [paralell to day 2]

And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

Genesis 1:22-25 [paralell to day 3]

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

At this point the tone shifts and God creates man and the sabbath.

So I ask again: Why do we take a poem and expect our science to match up with it?