Even the Hebrew and OT scholars in all world class universities freely admit that the account for origins in Genesis 1-2 and Ex 20:11 is nothing remotely compatible with evolution's own doctrine on origins. they are as far apart as day and night.
Ex 20 "
six days you shall labor...for in six days the LORD made" is so obviously "not" the evolutionism that is so popular today that it goes without saying.
Gen 2:
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2
By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.
Ex 20: "
six days you shall labor..."
Ex 20:11 For
in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that
is in them,
and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
Notice what the top scholars in Hebrew and OT studies are saying in all the world class universities about the basic most obvious features of "the text" of Genesis.
=============================================
Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford, has written:
‘Probably, so far as I know, there is
no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that
--the writer(s) of
Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that:
(a)
creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience
(b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story
(c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark.
Or, to put it negatively, the
apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood,
are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know."
=====================================
Those guys get "the basics" about "interpretation" and "translation" and "the kind of writing that it is" - stating that this aspect of the discussion is sooooo incredibly obvious and basic that even the agnostic/atheist/lib/left scholars see that one point clearly.
============
When you have blatantly obvious details in the Bible so clear that the Hebrew and OT scholars in all world class universities - plus all bible-believing Christians (those not inclined to toss out the Bible whenever evolutionism demands it) can see the point clearly.. we call that "the obvious part".
