After "revealing" my science background, I sense some of you now view me as anathema and perhaps little different from a heretic. So, perhaps it would help to know a little more about said background.
I've discussed and pondered the matter of Genesis 1 for close to 50 years. I was raised a young earth creationist (YEC), have always had a love of the Bible with a secondary love of science, and recognized at an early age the two did not always seem to be in agreement. Thus, began a lifelong quest to reconcile the two. A quest that led me to degrees in biology and paleontology with plans to follow that with Bible degrees. But alas, life has its turns, and God had other plans, so I was never able to finish the Bible degree.
I, of course, assumed my YEC views, which I staunchly defended, would be vindicated. That, after all, seemed to me the only possible correct interpretation of Genesis 1. An interpretation that I didn't realize at the time was marred by the modern age thinking of which I, and everyone else is a product.
YEC is an interesting paradox. On the one hand, it denies modern science as the product of 'evil,' 'sinful' man-made 'secular humanism' and atheism, which seeks to undermine the Bible. Yet, on the other hand YEC is so desperate to find validation for the Bible via the same modern scientific methods that it derides. YECs pride themselves, as I once did, on being 'faithful' to the true, literal meaning of Scripture without compromise to worldly philosophies. But now in hindsight, I see what most YECs can't yet see for themselves: their inconsistency. Some parts of Genesis they interpret literally, but some parts they don't. More often than not, YEC twists science (into non-science) to 'fit' the Bible, but sometimes they twist the Bible to 'fit' science.
In my case, I got my biology degree at a secular university. I was hypervigilant and on guard the whole time ever watchful for the evil evolutionary conspiracies that I knew from my YEC training awaited me and that would seek to erode my faith. But I found it was all a fiction. It was all imagined. There were no conspiracies in academic science seeking to conceal 'the real truth' about evolution-creation from the rest of the world. I found spiritually lost people, sure enough, but no conspiracies. If anything, I discovered annoyance. Like buzzing 'YEC' fly in your face annoyance at how YECs routinely, incessantly cherry pick, proof text, distort, misrepresent, malign, rip out of context the hard work of research scientists. I discovered this to be true. I realized in hindsight I had been guilty of such things myself. In my zeal for truth, I had fallen into error: the error of disingenuously misrepresenting scientists' work (without realizing it at the time), which does *not* make for a good Christ-like example.
A-ha! Some might say. Your faith in YEC was still eroded by the 'evil' secular system just as predicted. But it wasn't, actually. My YEC beliefs were stronger than ever upon earning my degree. Ironically, it was not the secular system at all, but my next degree in paleontology that I did at a Christian university, while studying under some of the world's top, leading YEC scientists. But these YECs were quite different; a different breed altogether. They were nice. They were honest, respectable, loving, and shined the light of Christ. They still had all the same YEC beliefs, but they did genuine scientific research that they published and interacted with other professional scientists in hopes of bringing them to a saving knowledge of Christ less because of science, and more because of their Christlike example; instead of the more vocal activist-like YEC that does little to no scientific research and just takes potshots from the sidelines.
These respectable YECs were *honest* (you think that would go without saying, but it doesn't). They were honest about where the evidence does and doesn't support YEC. I learned from these Young Earth Creationists that most of the scientific evidence does *not* in fact support a young earth, and learned that there is actually little to no evidence for a global flood at any time in Earth's history. (And even educated me about evidence for evolution!). So, how then can you believe in YEC? The answer I was given was *faith*. We don't have the scientific evidence now, but we have faith that one day if we keep researching that the scientific evidence *will* eventually vindicate YEC.
Can you say throw for a loop? Never in my wildest imagination could I ever conceive of such a turn of events. But the most important lesson I learned was *honesty* as a scientist and as a Christian. Always try to be as honest as I can. There are some things in Christianity for which we have evidence; strong, powerful evidence. But there are some things for which we don't, and where the evidence even seems to go against us. And it's okay to acknowledge that. I find non-Christians are actually more open to the gospel, when you acknowledge that from the start that you don’t have all the answers.
*And of course, then after all that, when I looked at the Bible side of things, I discovered my entire apologetic had after all those years been all wrong from the start. Modern science doesn't go against Genesis 1, but neither does it support it. Turns out it has next to nothing to do with it! The two are largely apples
and oranges 
that speak to different questions. I have learned how vitally important it is separate modern science from Scripture, at least initially. First, seek to understand what Scripture says, independently of science, and what does science say independently of Scripture. Failure to do this results in much anachronism, and reading back modern scientific ideas into Genesis 1 where they doesn't belong, and do 'violence' to the text. And it ends up missing the point.
*I've already noted the compelling evidence that Genesis 1 is a theological polemic against Egyptian pagan creation myths. But it doesn't stop there. There are many levels to Genesis 1, and its genre is unique: a combination of poetry and prose. "Exalted prose," as some call it. In addition to being an anti pagan polemic, Genesis 1 also seems to present creation as a cosmic temple of sorts in which God resides, and is ever present. Then in Genesis 2-3, Adam and Eve are described in terms of having a priestly function. The lampstand, branched Jewish menorah in the tabernacle and temple were actually symbolic of the tree of life in the garden.
*Throughout the Bible there exists this common thread that always seems to go back to God's Presence. God's Presence in creation from the beginning. God's Presence lost. God's Presence restored through the cross. God's Presence forevermore in Revelation where we see the tree of life again in the new heaven.
I've discussed and pondered the matter of Genesis 1 for close to 50 years. I was raised a young earth creationist (YEC), have always had a love of the Bible with a secondary love of science, and recognized at an early age the two did not always seem to be in agreement. Thus, began a lifelong quest to reconcile the two. A quest that led me to degrees in biology and paleontology with plans to follow that with Bible degrees. But alas, life has its turns, and God had other plans, so I was never able to finish the Bible degree.
I, of course, assumed my YEC views, which I staunchly defended, would be vindicated. That, after all, seemed to me the only possible correct interpretation of Genesis 1. An interpretation that I didn't realize at the time was marred by the modern age thinking of which I, and everyone else is a product.
YEC is an interesting paradox. On the one hand, it denies modern science as the product of 'evil,' 'sinful' man-made 'secular humanism' and atheism, which seeks to undermine the Bible. Yet, on the other hand YEC is so desperate to find validation for the Bible via the same modern scientific methods that it derides. YECs pride themselves, as I once did, on being 'faithful' to the true, literal meaning of Scripture without compromise to worldly philosophies. But now in hindsight, I see what most YECs can't yet see for themselves: their inconsistency. Some parts of Genesis they interpret literally, but some parts they don't. More often than not, YEC twists science (into non-science) to 'fit' the Bible, but sometimes they twist the Bible to 'fit' science.
In my case, I got my biology degree at a secular university. I was hypervigilant and on guard the whole time ever watchful for the evil evolutionary conspiracies that I knew from my YEC training awaited me and that would seek to erode my faith. But I found it was all a fiction. It was all imagined. There were no conspiracies in academic science seeking to conceal 'the real truth' about evolution-creation from the rest of the world. I found spiritually lost people, sure enough, but no conspiracies. If anything, I discovered annoyance. Like buzzing 'YEC' fly in your face annoyance at how YECs routinely, incessantly cherry pick, proof text, distort, misrepresent, malign, rip out of context the hard work of research scientists. I discovered this to be true. I realized in hindsight I had been guilty of such things myself. In my zeal for truth, I had fallen into error: the error of disingenuously misrepresenting scientists' work (without realizing it at the time), which does *not* make for a good Christ-like example.
A-ha! Some might say. Your faith in YEC was still eroded by the 'evil' secular system just as predicted. But it wasn't, actually. My YEC beliefs were stronger than ever upon earning my degree. Ironically, it was not the secular system at all, but my next degree in paleontology that I did at a Christian university, while studying under some of the world's top, leading YEC scientists. But these YECs were quite different; a different breed altogether. They were nice. They were honest, respectable, loving, and shined the light of Christ. They still had all the same YEC beliefs, but they did genuine scientific research that they published and interacted with other professional scientists in hopes of bringing them to a saving knowledge of Christ less because of science, and more because of their Christlike example; instead of the more vocal activist-like YEC that does little to no scientific research and just takes potshots from the sidelines.
These respectable YECs were *honest* (you think that would go without saying, but it doesn't). They were honest about where the evidence does and doesn't support YEC. I learned from these Young Earth Creationists that most of the scientific evidence does *not* in fact support a young earth, and learned that there is actually little to no evidence for a global flood at any time in Earth's history. (And even educated me about evidence for evolution!). So, how then can you believe in YEC? The answer I was given was *faith*. We don't have the scientific evidence now, but we have faith that one day if we keep researching that the scientific evidence *will* eventually vindicate YEC.
Can you say throw for a loop? Never in my wildest imagination could I ever conceive of such a turn of events. But the most important lesson I learned was *honesty* as a scientist and as a Christian. Always try to be as honest as I can. There are some things in Christianity for which we have evidence; strong, powerful evidence. But there are some things for which we don't, and where the evidence even seems to go against us. And it's okay to acknowledge that. I find non-Christians are actually more open to the gospel, when you acknowledge that from the start that you don’t have all the answers.
*And of course, then after all that, when I looked at the Bible side of things, I discovered my entire apologetic had after all those years been all wrong from the start. Modern science doesn't go against Genesis 1, but neither does it support it. Turns out it has next to nothing to do with it! The two are largely apples
and oranges that speak to different questions. I have learned how vitally important it is separate modern science from Scripture, at least initially. First, seek to understand what Scripture says, independently of science, and what does science say independently of Scripture. Failure to do this results in much anachronism, and reading back modern scientific ideas into Genesis 1 where they doesn't belong, and do 'violence' to the text. And it ends up missing the point.*I've already noted the compelling evidence that Genesis 1 is a theological polemic against Egyptian pagan creation myths. But it doesn't stop there. There are many levels to Genesis 1, and its genre is unique: a combination of poetry and prose. "Exalted prose," as some call it. In addition to being an anti pagan polemic, Genesis 1 also seems to present creation as a cosmic temple of sorts in which God resides, and is ever present. Then in Genesis 2-3, Adam and Eve are described in terms of having a priestly function. The lampstand, branched Jewish menorah in the tabernacle and temple were actually symbolic of the tree of life in the garden.
*Throughout the Bible there exists this common thread that always seems to go back to God's Presence. God's Presence in creation from the beginning. God's Presence lost. God's Presence restored through the cross. God's Presence forevermore in Revelation where we see the tree of life again in the new heaven.
