How Literal is Genesis

I would like to have a discussion among Christian believers who also accept the reality of evolution. In this thread I would like to assume evolution is true and leave debating its reality to other threads. I would also like only Christian believers to respond; loosely defined here as believing in Jesus: His deity, incarnation, death, resurrection, and into Him for salvation.Moving from an old earth position who otherwise accepts everything in Genesis as literal to one who (while still unsure) is moderately convinced that evolution indeed took place, I am finding myself struggling with Genesis. I would like to talk through this with some other believers who have already taken this path. Here would be some of my questions:Was Adam ever a real person? If he did exist, how many others were alive at the same time? Did someone named Cain ever kill someone named Abel? Was Adam the first man with a soul? Did all his contemporaries have souls? Was there a fall? Is the entire story just made up?Was Noah a real person? If the flood was only local, did it kill off all of mankind? (and from a science perspective: do we have evidence that it is impossible that the whole human race hit an 8 person bottle neck just 5k years ago or so).Was Abraham a real person? If the first 11 chapters or so are entirely mythical, when does Genesis start becoming historical? Did people really live into their 800s? If not, why is this written into Genesis? Is that part of the myth, or some translation mistake? (I know Dr. Meyers at Institute of Bible and Science suggests that the Hebrew is a translation of a mistranslation of another language where one little jot or tittle changes the number by a factor of ten, and if you decrease by a factor of ten you have very realistic ages for childbearing and death. I am not yet comfortable with this explanation though.I think that is enough for now. As you can see, I am just getting started on dealing with these issues. I have absolutely no philosophical hang-ups to the reality of evolution. If God wanted to evolve me from slime, so be it. He can do whatever He pleases. But I do have hang-ups to declaring parts of the Bible “aren't true”, or are myths. I have problems not believing Adam was a real person given his role in Romans 5.Edited by Pete OS, : No reason given.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Took out some extra line breaks. When doing a message, one should not use the "enter" key at the sentence end, unless it is also a paragraph end.Edited by AdminPD, : Title Typo Correction

WOW! I must admit, I was never expecting an answer that literalism of any sort didn't start until Judges. I thought we would all agree that Abraham at least was a real person (whether or not every miracle described in his life is accurate). I must admit that I am completely ignorant of the evidence for or against an exodus happening as described in the Bible, so I won't comment there.To answer the question, "does it matter" I must admit that in some ways it still continues to matter to me. It does matter to me that Jesus actually was a human, also God, who died, and was actually physically resurrected form the dead three days later. My trust is in the atonement that he provided and if it is just a story I don't know where else to turn for forgiveness. In a similar vein, though admittedly not identical, Abraham is used as an example of what it means to be made right with God through faith (Romans 4) and indeed, is a example of what that faith looks like. For this reason, it does matter to me that he really was a man that had this faith!Jar brings up a good point that not only should genetic evidence suggest there was a 8 person bottle neck among all humans 6000 years ago, but that there should be a two animal (or 7) bottleneck of ALL animals around that time. Now, I will confess complete ignorance of genetics, genetic evidence, or even what that bottleneck would look like. But I trust genetic researchers would notice this. I am comfortable with accepting a local flood that doesn't kill of all (or even most) animals in the world (such as Australian animals) but must admit a hangup in not concluding that all humans died. I need to research the evidence the people populated North America and Australia predated flood times. Edited by AdminPD, : Edit Box

Truthlover: I appreciate your concern, and look forward to your replies.For everyone else: I agree with you that historicity is not necessarily for it to teach us something. And yet I still admit I am a little disheartened by your responses. I suppose I am still holding on to some inerrancy which I will loosely define at the moment as that it was written by or intended to be written by God himself. Adam and Eve, and maybe Noah could be God's work to explain principles to us, but to assume the entire Israel history up through Judges or worst is simply fable is a little much for me.

I thank everyone for your input. I remain a bit overwelmed at this point. I agree that Bible can have value or teach us even if much of it didn't take place historically as we define it today, but my view on inerrancy might be a bit to strong to jump to this conclusion. I will admit (with respect to the back and forth between Nador and Truthlover) that I will believe EVERYTHING in the Bible until there is evidence on the contrary; for me, the Bible was evidence itself.Some here appear to view the Bible as imperfect and the work of men (I define imperfect here as not actually being completly inspired by God.) Others view it as perfectly inspired by God but he allowed for myth, fable, or the distortion of details over time as long as they remained what He wanted to teach. For me, the historicity of Jesus is important to my trusting in Him for salvation. Like I started in my intro, I was always pretty much old earth, so I never really gave my credance to statements made by such figures as Ken Ham, that if we can't trust one sentence of it, we can't trust any of it, including the parts about Jesus. But after reading this thread I am getting even more nervous. Yes, I know I am slow to learn that my own 21st century view of truth might not gel with what was 'true' for 5th BC Hebrews; yet if nothing in the old testament is historical, then why do I think anything in the New Testament is historical? I came to this thread afraid but ready to jettison Adam and Eve as a Myth and was never expecting to have Abraham, or King David(!) to go out as well.I think it might be best if I purposly avoid studying archeology as it pertains to Biblical evidence. Ignorance is bliss!

As I said in the preceding post, I agree a story can have an important message without having happened historically. Indeed, nearly if not all of the parables of Jesus served this purpose! But two things from your example 1) I don't consider the moral of the Pied Piper to be revelation from God and 2) in the case of the resurrection, I am not merely looking for a moral but actually trusting the physical event to cover over my sins. It would appear at least Paul, if you accept that his letters originated from him, took the reality of the resurrection as utmost importance. Jesus's Parables are easy to distinguish as Stories. As I read the Adam and Eve story again, I think it appears to be easily identified as a story within the context of Hebrew identity. But King David? At some point I must come to terms with the idea that I can not at all distinguish between stories with lessons to be learned and real life events with eternal consequences.

I agree that those sentences don't go together. That was a very poorly worded paragraph. I was doing a quick summary the first couple of sentences and then made a sudden transition in thought without any warning.To try to elaborate, many here claim that God can inspire the Bible with a message using events and/or stories that did not really happen. In some respects, I was coming into this thread with that expectation as it seemed Adam and Eve and perhaps even Noah were going to have to be stories without a history as defined by 21st century western thinking. What I was not expecting was for the bulk of the OT history to be shed in a similar light (albeit not by everyone here, there is some disagreement). At this point I do get a little Ken-Hamish and wonder whether we would have any precident to trust the historicity of Jesus if we don't trust the historicity of the first 9/10 tenths of the Bible. And while you can convince me that Adam and Eve was a story with a very important message about God as creator, I am sticking that the events of Jesus's life, most notably his death and ressurection, are not simply a story but an actual event that matters in 21st century spacetime. (jar my disagree, though I don't think this is the thread to hash this out) Now I see what you are saying that not acceping Adam and Eve as literal stories does not nessisarily discredit the NT as Ken Ham might claim. But I was expecting a discussion about how Adam and Eve are a fable, and maybe even Noah, with some contextual clues from the OT itself, with full assurance that Abraham really went to Cannann and really believed God and had it credited to him as righteousness.I am not ultimatly disagreeing with anyone here. I definitly need to think about it more. I am just being transparant and relaying the fact that it has made me more unsettled then when I started.Edited by Pete OS, : No reason given.

That was just a joke. However, it is true I don't have a whole lot of time (like most people) and probably will not study archeology to the level that I would understand its genuine objections to OT history.I agree with what you say in your post. I tell others often that changed lives is the only meaningful examination of my faith. I admit complete circular reasoning in my faith in the Bible. If God is real and activily working in people's lives, it should not be indistiguishable from the lives of those without God. I don't recall you inviting me to visit your website. Coicidently I did skim over it on my own when I first found this board; I will take a closer look as time permits.

A valid question. One I'm sure it hashed out a thousand times on seperate boards and one of which I'm sure I would do little to convince you of. But either way, I don't think it is appriopiate for this thread. I would like to keep this a discussion among Christian believers as I requested in the OP. Thanks.