Yes it does, as do you.
Genesis provides an outline or framework for Creation, but it was never intended to be a science book.
Playing the tape again, I see. You know, I think I have this speech memorized every bit as well as you do.
Genesis is a theological work that affirms that God created the world and explains the "evolution" of human nature through original sin. It explains out existence in theological terms, but never hints at the existence of the science that fills in the blanks. You see, science and math are nothing more than the language in which God's works are further explained, not a substitute or an alternative for His works.
Then I guess the "new testament" doesn't teach the virgin birth, transubstantiation, or the resurrection either. After all, it's a theological work and science has explained to us that these things can't really happen.
I'm disappointed. We got so close to the point of the matter in our last discussion (I had this idea you were about to say that it's as natural for the laws of science to exist as it is for G-d to exist), but no, you opted to make The Speech.
Here's my speech (which you probably don't have memorized because you've never read it--"open-minded" fellow that you are):
Science can only tell us about the world before it. It cannot tell us a thing about the supernatural processes of creation or the world in its formative state before the laws of nature actually began to function.
But then, you believe the laws of nature are eternal, so that means nothing to you.
Again, I don't need you to surmise what I do and don't believe.
It is a shame you only gave it six years and didn't pursue your questions or concerns to a greater depth. You would have found the deficiencies you perceived were within you and not the Church. Creation and all that is in it, including the laws of nature, as you call them, were created "ab initio temporis", which is a more complete explanation than "ex nihilo". I would encourage you to explore this further.
Good speech.
FWIW I have no difficulty believing (as best I can) the first eleven chapters of Genesis.As for how He may have done it...."For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast" seems pretty plain.As far as I'm concerned He could have done it all in 5 minutes.
I've met many christians who have used the word "fundy" as a type of slur.Some of them were shocked when I pointed out that it is they themselves who are actually the very fundies the world is talking about.
This is my speach FWIW...fundies appear to be seen as radical nutjobs who actually believe the Genesis creation account as it is written and because of that rampant anti-intellectualism are prone to also believing all sorts of apocalyptical non-sense and may even be deluded enough to try and hasten along some of their fantasies and are therefore prone to harbor similar feelings toward their fellows as some terrorists do.They are at best stupid and ignorant and at worst to be feared.Just like 'fundy' moslems.