This question is made from the perspective of Old Earth Creationism (OEC), especially that espoused by Hugh Ross at reasons.org. I have also created a website at big.bible to explore these questions more fully. Many of the books of Hugh Ross (e.g., Navigating Genesis) make the point that the sequence of events described in Genesis 1 follows very closely to the sequence of events that scientists have discovered about the evolution of the earth and earth's forms of plant and animal life over the last 4.5 billion years. If this is really true, it would mean that the writer of Genesis 1 would almost certainly have received this knowledge from the Creator since Genesis 1 was written over 3000 years ago when there would have been no natural way to know the exact sequence of events over the last 4.5 billion years. That 4.5 billion year sequence has only been put together by scientists in the last several hundred years. Put in another way, if this description of the scientific sequence of events of the last 4.5 billion years was accurately portrayed in Genesis over 3000 years ago, would this more or less prove that the Bible was divinely inspired, meaning that it was written by inspiration from the Creator of the universe?
As a note to those who might say that Genesis is a literary or inspirational document and not a scientific document, I would share the following thoughts. Since the Creator of of the universe is also the Creator of language, then it would seem straightforward for this Creator to make a narrative that could be both scientifically accurate as well as inspiring from a literary perspective. And in so doing, Genesis could then be used for inspiration and guidance for the last several millennia. And now when we can understand the Scriptures from a scientific perspective as well, then that could show even more the Creator's unfathomable intelligence and wisdom. We could then see this correlation between science and Genesis 1 as a new gift that the Creator has given us to marvel even more at His power, wisdom, and majesty.
Finally, although this may sound like an opinion-based question since it supposes an OEC viewpoint, what I am really looking for here is feedback on the logic of this question. It would seem very profound if we could make these claims of an almost scientific proof for the Bible, so on a logical basis I am asking if anyone can see any fallacies in this logic before I begin making such a claim to others.