Appreciate your thought, but some scientist feel differently.
If I as a geologist were called upon to explain briefly our modern ideas of the origin of the earth and the development of life on it to a simple, pastoral people, such as the tribes to whom the Book of Genesis was addressed, I could hardly do better than follow rather closely much of the language of the first chapter of Genesis. This geologist, Wallace Pratt, also noted that the order of eventsfrom the origin of the oceans, to the emergence of land, to the appearance of marine life, and then to birds and mammalsis essentially the sequence of the principal divisions of geologic time.
As to 'other myths' they differ substantially.
Many find it hard to accept this creation account. They contend that it is drawn from the creation myths of ancient peoples, primarily those from ancient Babylon. However, as one recent Bible dictionary noted: No myth has yet been found which explicitly refers to the creation of the universe and the myths are marked by polytheism and the struggles of deities for supremacy in marked contrast to the Heb[rew] monotheism of [Genesis] 1-2. Regarding Babylonian creation
legends, the trustees of the British Museum stated: The fundamental conceptions of the Babylonian and Hebrew accounts are essentially different. -- from previous post.
And you are correct when you say that gen is an earth centric viewpoint. That's what the account is about. The only real reference to universal matter, including early earth when it was a liquid waste is gen 1:1. And vre 2a
There are other parts of the bible that deal, not with the creation of the universe, but with spacific knowledge of the universe that ancients didn't possess.
This part is still earth.
Job 38
4 Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth?
Tell [me], if you do know understanding.
5 Who set its measurements, in case you know,
Or who stretched out upon it the measuring line?
6 Into what have its socket pedestals been sunk down,
Or who laid its cornerston -- end quote
Socket pedestals. While ocean crust is rather thin, mountain areas have 'roots' that go down more than five miles below surface, sockit pedistals sunk down.
Light:
19 Where, now, is the way to where light resides?
As for darkness, where, now, is its place,
20 That you should take it to its boundary
And that you should understand the roadways to its house?
21 Have you come to know because at that time you were being born,
And [because] in number your days are many?
24 Where, now, is the way by which the light distributes itself,
The writing of Job is credited to moses. Job lived just prior to moses. Job was not a hebrew, but a worshiper of the same God, Jehovah. What other religious account can you find from antiquity, bp35oo, that adresses the origen, pathways, constitution of light?
Scientists are still wrestling with these issues that Job started.
31Can you tie fast the bonds of the Kimah constellation,
Or can you loosen the very cords of the Kesil constellation?
32 Can you bring forth the Mazzaroth constellation in its appointed time?
And as for the Ash constellation alongside its sons, can you conduct them?
33 Have you come to know the statutes of the heavens,
What ancient people knew that the universe was bound by unseen forces?
Even till just a handfull of centuries past, science was shrouded with celestial folklore that makes Job's words ring of high science. Please show me some ancient religious document that mentions the bonds of stellar matter. And were in writings of that time will you find reference to the statutes of the heavens? Some one told Job that the heavens had statutes, laws, governing principles 3700bp. Moses merely compiled it 3500 BP. Again the Bible is not about science. It's about God and man. But where it touches science at such remote times, how can you explain them having such knowledge.
There are many other points, but this just took me about 45 minutes. It's enough for now.
™ Version 4.2
