The Scientific Accuracy of Genesis

Sometimes Christian scientists are tempted to read rather deeply into certain passages. There are three that seem to get some attention in the hands of enthusiastic theorizers. First is Genesis 1:6-8. “And God said, ‘Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.’ So God made the vault and separated the water from under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. God called the vault ‘sky.’ And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.” Most folks interested in creation science have heard about “the water canopy theory.” The idea is derived from these verses. It hypothesizes that the “water above” the sky was some kind of liquid or vapor “canopy,” such as an ozone layer, that contributed to a global tropical climate. Other less well-known theories hypothesize that this “water canopy” was actually much farther out in space, possibly encompassing more celestial bodies than just the Earth (the verses addressed below, Genesis 1:14-19, certainly seem to indicate that the planets and stars are within the “sky.” However, I think the solution could be far simpler than that. It helps to try to think with the mindset of those to whom the book was written—namely the Hebrew nation, under Moses’ command. When a comparatively ancient culture like the Israelites received this text, I doubt that they would have thought of the “vault” as anything beyond what they could see with their eyes. The water below, reflecting blue, looked like the blue sky above—the waters above. This seems overly simple and scientifically impossible at first glance, but is it really? Among the other gasses of Earth’s atmosphere, water vapor certainly makes up a portion (it is a greenhouse gas). Actually, I don’t think I would expect God to mention the various elements that make up the atmosphere because there weren’t even any names in human language for those things. Essentially, to the understanding of the day, it was water above. I don’t think God was being deceptive; but he might have been keeping it very simple.

There are other cases of God “oversimplifying” scientific concepts that we generally never think of as being a problem. “And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on 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 vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 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.” We all know that the moon does not actually give off light—it merely reflects the light of the sun. So was God deceptive? Absolutely not! Light is certainly shining from the moon and that, more than likely, fit within the cultural definition of a “light” in Biblical days. The scientific definitions and details of our modern understanding of science are of no importance here.

Finally, I would like to address this popular idea that there was no rain before the global flood. It is certainly possible that it never rained before the flood, but it probably didn’t cross the mind of the authors and readers of the Bible when it was written. The context of the source verse for this idea is actually subject to a lot of unnecessary controversy. “Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. Then the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” (Genesis 2:5). It says, “the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth,” some like to quote. However, the context of the verse is a description of when “no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up.” I’m sure there were plants growing between the creation of man and the flood. But one might argue that it is chronologically ordered, I suppose, but that doesn’t work. The next verse says that God “formed the man.” So, man was created. If one had just read the previous chapter, it was abundantly clear that plants came before mankind. Rather, it seems to be simply a vague, non-detailed description of the world before a completed creation. Let me know what you think in the comments below, but it seems like God doesn’t value scientific detail as much as we might today.