Good gosh! Must you be so demanding! haha
Going back to a long-ago post, scholars recognize the stylistic differences in the Hebrew of Gen. 1 vs. Gen. 2-11 vs. Gen. 12-50. Is Genesis 1 history? The style says it is something other than that. It has more in common with Hebrew poetry than historical narrative. Gen. 12-50, on the other hand, is in the style of a typical Hebrew historical narrative. What about Gen. 2-11? It falls somewhere in between the near-poetry of Gen. 1 and the more straightforward style of Gen. 12-50. For a Hebrew reader of Genesis, then, the impression would be one of increasing “realism”, in terms of writing style, as it progresses toward the patriarchal narratives of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and their offspring. Even in English translation, that is the impression one gets reading Genesis from end to end. The farther back the author reaches into the distant past, the more poetic and stylized his language becomes.
This should tell us something about how to interpret the book. Genesis 1 should not be interpreted like Genesis 12, as if both were historical narratives. The author has arranged his material to make a theological point, not to instruct us about the exact chronological order of creation. The point is to place man in his proper setting, as related to his Creator, to his fellow man (male and female He created them), and to the rest of creation. Again, if you want a Scriptural example, so that Scripture may interpret Scripture, I point you to Luke. In Luke 9:51-19:47, he has taken certain events of Jesus’ life “out of context” and rearranged them to make a more important point, which is theological. The exact chronology was less important than the lesson to be taught to Jesus’ future disciples. Did Luke “mislead” us by not telling us the story as a modern biographer would, in exact chronological order of the events? Of course not. Similarly, Moses was less concerned with chronology than theology. He wanted his people to think rightly about the Most High God, and how all of humanity owes him allegiance as Creator. In that, I’d say the Lord’s word succeeded quite nicely in its purpose, despite whatever misunderstandings we have burdened it with yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
As the rain and the snow
come down from heaven,
and do not return to it
without watering the earth
and making it bud and flourish,
so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater,
so is my word that goes out from my mouth:
It will not return to me empty,
but will accomplish what I desire
and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.