"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world ARE CLEARLY SEEN, being understood by the THINGS THAT ARE MADE"... (Romans 1:20, KJV).
The principle of "observation" as proof, is not only stated in the Bible, (as indicated in the passage above), but is also recognized by the scientific method as one of its' principles as well. In order for a scientific theory to be valid, it must be observable. That's what Sir Issac Newton used when he dropped an apple and observed the force of gravity acting on the apple. The force of gravity, then became part of Newton's theory about the "Laws of Motion".
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" Albert Einstein.
I agree with Einstein. Religion without science is blind. To me the Genesis creation story is filled with fact, that has been substantiated by modern science. Science says the universe began with the "Big Bang". Take a look at the first three lines of Genesis. "The earth was without form and void"(Gen.1:2)... What is earth (matter), without form ??? The Bible is talking about subatomic matter, isn't it ?! "And God moved upon the face of the waters". What are the different faces (forms) of water ? Isn't its' molecular designation H2o one of them ?! (two parts hydrogen, one part oxygen).
What happens when an atom of hydrogen is "moved upon", or "split" ?! You release an awful lot of energy, don't you ? Energy in the form of what ??? "And God said, Let there be Light" (Gen.1:3) !!! What science calls the Big Bang. The theory of hydrogen fission is right there staring everyone in the face, in the first three lines of Genesis.
You read a little further, and it says life was brought forth from the waters (Gen. 1:21). I believe science also states as well life on this planet began in the oceans. It also says, "God created the great whales and every winged fowl"... The word "whale" as it appears in the KJV Bible, is of course a poor transliteration. In the original Hebrew text, the words appear, "God created the terrible creatures that are in the sea". Today we know of course whales are not terrifying creatures at all, but that's what they had when they wrote the KJV. We also know the ancient oceans were once filled with truly terrifying marine reptiles. Horrifying predators like Plesiosaurs and Kronosaurus. Am I surprised the Bible mentions the creation of fowl in the same verse with dinosaurs. Not at all. I'd be surprised if it didn't.
Science now recognizes modern birds (fowl) are the direct descendants of dinosaurs. In fact, today dinosaurs are scientifically divided into one of two major categories. Avian (bird-like) and Non-Avian Dinosaurs. From the fossil record, we know raptors were covered with short, downy (pre-flight) feathers, while other dinosaurs (Thuropods) did not share this characteristic. The dinosaur "Archeoptorix" developed full flight feathers, and was probably at least capable of gliding from one tree to another. So it's scientifically correct, for the Bible to mention dinosaurs and fowl "together", as some dinosaur (like Archeoptorix), were more bird like than reptile.
Genesis 1:24 describes a later creation, in which the (earth) brings forth cattle (mammals), creeping things (modern insects and reptiles), and beast of the earth. Is this a description of the emergence of animal life after the extinction of the dinosaurs ???. Life adapting to it's environment on earth ?! Evolution ? Isn't that what science teaches ???
What "beast" is the Bible referring to in Genesis 1:24 ?! I think we know from the fossil record and the bones of the early hominids we've discovered. Australopithicus and their relatives. Neanderthal and Cromagnon, early homo-sapiens come next. Then about ten thousand years ago, evolution is suddenly and inexplicably interrupted, with the appearance of homo sapien-sapien, or modern man. Science admits, they are unable to produce the "missing link" that connects us directly to these earlier creatures.
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness".. (Genesis 1:26).
Notice also in Genesis 1:28, this creation of man in the image of God is commanded to be "fruitful, multiple and replenish the earth". Although early hominids and homo-sapiens existed, they certainly never existed in numbers that suggest they were fruitful, or dominating the earth. The use of the word "replenish" in this verse is also interesting, as it suggests refilling the earth with something that had once been there, but disappeared.
"And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground" (Genesis 4:2).
The story of Cain and Able is also fascinating from a scientific standpoint. According to the University of Jerusalem, archeology has proven the earliest evidence of agriculture appears around the Sea of Galilee where the earth was first tilled and grain was harvested and grinded. However, the first evidence of the domestication of livestock (sheep and cattle) appears in the Near East and Central Asia, where the first ancient cities appear. After Cain slew Able and he was banished, Cain was also cursed so that the earth would no longer yield anything when it was tilled, (Genesis 4:12), and Cain became the builder of a city, (Gen.4:17).
So in almost every respect, the origin of life on this planet, as well as the chronology of its' development, and the story of how agriculture and livestock developed separately, are both the same in science and in the Bible. What do you think ? Are science and religion that far apart on the creation story ? Not the way I read it, they aren't.